Future renewable energy costs: solar photovoltaics

Future renewable energy costs: solar photovoltaicsHow technology innovation is anticipated to reduce the cost of energy from European photovoltaic installations

Renewable Energies

KIC InnoEnergy

The challenge is big, but our goal is simple: to achieve a sustainable energy future for Europe. Innovation is the answer. New ideas, products and solutions that make a real difference, new businesses and new people to deliver them to market.

At KIC InnoEnergy we support and invest in innovation at every stage of the journey – from classroom to customers. With our network of partners we build connections across Europe, bringing together inventors and industry, entrepreneurs and markets, graduates and employers, researchers and businesses.

We work in three essential areas of the innovation mix:•Educationtohelpcreateaninformedand

ambitious workforce that understands what sustainability demands and industry needs – for the future of the industry.

• InnovationProjectstobringtogetherideas,inventorsand industry in collaboration to enable commercially viable products and services that deliver real results.

•BusinessCreationServicestohelpentrepreneursand start-ups who are creating sustainable businesses to grow rapidly to contribute to Europe’s energy ecosystem.

Together, our work creates and connects the building blocks for the sustainable energy industry that Europe needs.

Frontcoverimage©PaoloV.Chiantorre


KIC InnoEnergyRenewable Energies

Authors

Paolo V. Chiantore, Kenergia SviluppoIvan Gordon, IMECWinfried Hoffmann, Applied Solar Expertise - ASE Emiliano Perezagua, Consultores de Energía FotovoltaicaSimon Philipps, Fraunhofer ISEEduardo Roman, TecnaliaEric Sandre, EDF R&DWim Sinke, ECN

Emilien Simonot, KIC InnoEnergyAntoni Martínez, KIC InnoEnergy

Uses methodology developed by BVG Associates and KIC InnoEnergy. Uses tool provided under licence by BVG Associates © 2015 www.bvgassociates.co.uk

Executive summaryKIC InnoEnergy is developing credible future technology cost models for four renewable energy generation technologies using a consistent and robust methodology. The purpose of these cost models is to enable the impact of innovations on the levelised cost of energy (LCOE) to be explored and tracked in a consistent way across the four technologies. While the priority is to help focus on key innovations, credibility comes with a realistic overall LCOE trajectory. This report examines how technology innovation is anticipated to reduce the cost of energy from European photovoltaic installations over the next 15 years.

For this report, input data is closely based on the KIC InnoEnergy technology strategy and roadmap work stream published in July 2014. The output of that work was an exhaustive and comprehensive set of many discrete innovations and groups of innovations together with their potential impact on known reference plant, built on expert vision and knowledge. For this report, the temporal scope of KIC InnoEnergy technology strategy and roadmap, 5 years ahead, has been extended 15 years according to the methodology set up for this series of report.

AttheheartofthisstudyisacostmodelinwhichelementsofbaselinePVinstallationsareimpactedonbyarangeoftechnologyinnovations.ThesePVinstallationsaredefinedin terms of the Technology Type (conventional crystalline silicon, high efficiency silicon and thin film), site conditions (groundmounted,5MWandbelow100kW, rooftopPVinstallations on a mid-radiation site: 1,320 kWh/m2/yr), and three points in time at which the projects reach the final investment decision (FID) (2015 (the baseline), 2020 and 2030). In this study, the plants lifetime is set to 20 years for LCOE calculation matters.

The combined impact that technology innovations over the period are anticipated to have on projectswith different combinations of Technology Type and Site Type ispresented in Figure 0.1.

© Em

ilien S

imon

ot

05

Future renewable energy costs: solar photovoltaics 06

TheimpactsfromPVinnovations(excludingtransmission,decommissioning,supplychainand finance effects) contribute at least an anticipated 22% reduction in the LCOE. Figure 0.21 shows that more than 80% of the total anticipated technology impact is achieved through seven innovations, mainly in the area of cell manufacturing for crystalline silicon technologies with also relevant contributions related to the improvement of inverters lifetime and frameless module concepts. In the area of thin films, the seven most important innovations account for more than 90% of the total anticipated technology impact, mainly in the area of module manufacturing as well as regarding the extension of inverters lifetime.

The study concludes that LCOE2 savings of at least 37% are anticipated for conventional c-Si technology,49% forhighefficiencyc-Si technologyandat least44% for thin film.The obtained improvements are slightly less important for rooftop installations than for groundmountedPVplants.

More than 30 technology innovations were identified as having the potential to cause a substantial reduction in LCOE through a change in the design of hardware, software or process. Technology innovations are distinguished from supply chain innovations, which are addressed separately. Many more technical innovations are being developed, so some of those described in this report may be superseded by others. Overall, however, industry expectation is that the LCOE will reduce to values included in a range that includes the aggregate level described. In most cases, the anticipated impact of each innovation has been significantly moderated downwards in order to give overall LCOE reductions in line with industry expectations. The availability of this range of innovations with the potential to impact LCOE further gives confidence that the picture described is achievable.

To calculate a realistic LCOE for each scenario, real-world effects of supply chain dynamics, pre-FID risks, the cost of finance, transmission and decommissioning are considered in addition to technology innovations.

2 Negativevaluesindicateareductionintheitemandpositivevaluesindicateanincreaseintheitem.AllOPEXfiguresareperyear,fromyearsix.TheLCOEcalculationsarebasedonthecapitalexpenditure(CAPEX),operationalexpenditure(OPEX)andannualenergyproduction(AEP)valuespresented.Thisisinordertopresentaccuraterelativecostchangeswhileonlyshowingtheimpactoftechnologyinnovations.AppendixBprovidesdatabehindallfiguresinthisreport.

Figure 0.1 Anticipated impact of all innovations by Technology Type with FID in 2030, compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 20151.

Impact on OPEX

0% -10% -20% -30% -40%

Tech Conv HighEff TF

Impact on CAPEX

0% -10% -20% -30% -40%


Impact on LCOE

0% -10% -20% -30% -40%


Impact on net AEP

8% 6% 4% 2% 0%


Source: KIC InnoEnergy •Ground •Roof

KIC InnoEnergy · Renewable Energies07

Figure 0.2b Anticipated impact of technology innovations for a ground mounted PV Installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology and with FID in 2030, compared with a PV installation with FID in 2015.

LCOE for a PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2015Improvement of existing heterojunction & new generation of cell heterojunction design

Advanced existing Homojunction technologiesImprovement of inverter lifetime

Back contact cell structuresImprovement for Si material feedstock, FBR and metalurgical silicon

Innovative framing, frameless conceptsImprovement in silicon crystallisation

14 other innovationsLCOE for a PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2030

Source: KIC InnoEnergy

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%

Figure 0.2a Anticipated impact of technology innovations for a ground mounted PV Installation using Conventional c-Si technology and with FID in 2030, compared with a PV installation with FID in 2015.

LCOE for a PV installation using Conventional c-Si technology with FID in 2015Advanced existing Homojunction technologies

Improvement of inverter lifetimeImprovement for Si material feedstock, FBR and metalurgical silicon

Improvement of existing heterojunction & new generation of cell heterojunction designInnovative framing, frameless concepts

Improvement in silicon crystallisationInnovations in wafering

13 other innovationsLCOE for a PV installation using Conventional c-Si technology with FID in 2030


70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%

Figure 0.2c Anticipated impact of technology innovations for a ground mounted PV Installation using TF technology and with FID in 2030, compared with a PV installation with FID in 2015.

LCOE for a PV installation using TF technology with FID in 2015Reduce efficiency gap Lab cells-Fab modules

Increase module efficiencyImprovement of inverter lifetime

Mitigation of degradation mechanismsImproved deposition techniques

Development and integration of quality control methodsImproved light management

5 other innovationsLCOE for a PV installation using TF technology with FID in 2030


50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Inc-Sicellmanufacturing,theinnovationsaddresstheupperpartofthevaluechain,fromsilicon feedstock, the crystallisation process, wafering and the different cell architectures. TheLCOE is anticipated todropby around16% for conventional c-Si technologyandbyaround22%forHighEfficiencyc-Siduringtheperiod.

On top of those cell manufacturing innovations, further innovations affecting module manufacturing are anticipated to reduce the LCOE by 2 to 3.5% in the period depending onthetechnologyandsitetype.ThemajorbenefitherecomesfromCAPEXreductionwiththe introduction of frameless concepts as well as alternative backsheet materials and front covers.OnechallengeforPVmodulemanufacturerswillbetoreachevermorestreamlinedprocesses meaning a step change in verification testing. Focusing on demonstrating long term module reliability to customers is also seen as critical to maintain high levels of competitiveness.

Together, all the innovations in thin film module manufacturing generate about a 25% reduction in the LCOE during the period, mainly through the optimisation of manufacturing processes. Key innovations come together to bridge the gap existing between small scale lab sample production and large volume module manufacturing facilities.

The impact of innovations in inverters is dominated by improvements in lifetime increase, through new designs and the use of new materials to reduce the stress on components. Also significant are the developments in integrated electronics and smart module concepts. Combined, innovations in inverters are anticipated to reduce the LCOE by approximately 5% over the period.

The two biggest innovations in OMS are related to the introduction of smart PV plantmonitoring techniques as well as vegetation maintenance reduction techniques. Zero cleaning solutions are also under study in this report although the end impact thereof on LCOE is limited due to a relatively low market penetration. We anticipate the reduction in the LCOE due to such innovations to be approximately 1% during the period.

Overall,reductionsinCAPEXpermegawattinstalledovertheperiodareanticipatedtobebetween approximately 19% and 32% during the period and depending to the technology considered. OMS costs are anticipated to drop by approximately 20% and AEP, at fixednominal capacity, is anticipated to increase by around 3% to 6%. From a higher baseline, CAPEX reductions aregreater forHigh Efficiency c-Si and TF technologies. This is due tothe relatively lower maturity level of these technologies that making the way for more significant improvement.

There are a range of innovations not discussed in detail in this report because their anticipated impact may still be negligible on projects reaching FID in 2030. Amongst these arematerialsandconceptssuchasperovskitesandconcentratedPV.OnaPV installationlevel, improved logistics and installation methods and advanced O&M strategies offer the prospectoffurthersavings,alongwithchangestoPVinstallationdesignlife.Onasystemlevel, there is expected to be significant further progress in terms of voltage increase for generating assets. The unused potential at FID in 2030 of innovations modelled in the project, coupled with this further range of innovations not modelled, suggests there are significant further cost reduction opportunities when looking to 2030 and beyond.

09 KIC InnoEnergy · Renewable Energies

10

Glossary

AEP. Annual energy production.Anticipated impact. Term used in this report to quantify the anticipated market impact of a given innovation. This figure has been obtained by moderating the potential impact through theapplicationofvariousreal-worldfactors.Fordetailsonthemethodology,seeSection2.BIPV.BuildingIntegratedPhotovoltaics.BoS.BalanceofSystem:forthepurposeofthisdocument,theBoSreferstothesupportstructuresandelectricalarray,seeAppendixA.Moregenerally,inphotovoltaics,BoSreferstoeverythingotherthanthePVmodules.Baseline. Term used in this report to refer to “today’s” technology, as would be incorporated into a project.Capacity Factor (CF). Ratio of annual energy production to annual energy production when a plant is generating continuously at rated power.CAPEX. Capital expenditure.CPV.ConcentratedPhotovoltaics.Conv c-Si. Conventional crystalline silicon technology.DECEX. Decommissioning expenditure.FEED. Front end engineering and design.FID. Final investment decision, defined here as the point in a project’s life cycle at which all consent, agreements and contracts required in order to commence construction have been signed (or are at or near the execution stage) and there is a firm commitment by equity holders and, if applicable, of debt finance or debt funders, to provide or mobilise funding to cover the majority of construction costs.Generic WACC. Weighted average cost of capital applied to generate LCOE-based comparisonsoftechnicalinnovationsacrosscertainscenarios.DifferentfromScenario-specificWACC.HighEff c-Si. High Efficiency crystalline silicon technology.HJ. Heterojunction.LCOE. Levelised cost of energy, considered here as pre-tax and real in mid-2014 terms. For detailsofmethodology,seeSection2.MW. Megawatt.MWh. Megawatt hour.OMS. Operations, planned maintenance and unplanned (proactive or reactive) service in response to a fault.OPEX. Operational expenditure.Other effects. Effects beyond those of power plant innovations, such as supply chain competition and changes in financing costs.Potential impact. Term used in this report to quantify the maximum potential technical impact of a given innovation. This impact is then moderated through the application of variousreal-worldfactors.Fordetailsofmethodology,seeSection2.RD&D. Research, development and demonstration.Scenario. A specific combination of Technology Type and year of FID.Scenario-specific WACC. WeightedaveragecostofcapitalassociatedwithaspecificScenario.Usedtocalculatereal-worldLCOEincorporatingothereffects,ref.Section2.4.Technology Type. Term used in this report to describe a specific photovoltaic technological trend for which baseline costs are derived and to which innovations are applied. For details of themethodologyseeSection2.TF. Thin Film.WACC. Weighted average cost of capital, considered here as real and pre-tax.WCD. Works completion date.

11

Table of contents

Executive summary 05

Glossary 10

1. Introduction 13

2. Methodology 15

3. Baseline PV installations 19

4. Innovations in c-Si PV cell manufacturing 23

5. Innovations in c-Si PV module manufacturing 31

6. Innovation in TF module technology 37

7. Innovations in inverters 43

8. Innovations in operations, maintenance and service 49

9. Summary of the impact of innovations 55

10. Conclusions 59

11. About KIC InnoEnergy 62

Appendix A. Further details of methodology 64 AppendixB.Datasupportingtables 69

List of figures 74 List of tables 75

KIC InnoEnergy · Renewable Energies

13

1. Introduction1.1. FrameworkAs a promoter of innovation, KIC InnoEnergy is interested in assessing the impact of visible innovation on the cost of energy from various renewable energy technologies. This analysis is critical to understand where the biggest opportunities and challenges are from a technological point of view.

In publishing a series of consistent analyses of various technologies, KIC InnoEnergy hopes to help in the understanding and definition of innovation pathways that industries could follow to maintain the competitiveness of the European renewable energy sector worldwide. In addition, it seeks to help solve the existing challenges on a European level: reducing energy dependency, mitigating the effects of climate change and facilitating the smooth evolution of the energy mix for the end consumer.

With a time frame extending to 2030, this work includes a range of innovations that may be further from the market than normally expected of KIC InnoEnergy. This constitutes a longer term approach, complementary to KIC InnoEnergy’s technology mapping focusing on innovations reaching the market in the short to mid-term (up to five years into the future).

1.2. Purpose and backgroundThe purpose of this report is to document the anticipated future solar photovoltaic cost of energy for projects reaching their financial investment decision (FID) in 2030, through reference to robust modelling of the impact of a range of technical innovations and other effects. This work is based on KIC InnoEnergy’s technological strategy and workstream roadmap published in July 2014. This earlier work involved significant industry engagement, as detailed in the above report. This has been enhanced by continued dialogue with players across the industry, right up until publication of this report.

ThestudydoesnotconsiderthemarketshareofthedifferentPhotovoltaicTechnologyTypes considered. The actual average levelised cost of energy (LCOE) in a given year will depend on the mix of such parameters for projects with FID in that year.

© Co

miso

- Pa

olo V.

Chian

tore


1.3. Structure of this reportThis report is structured as follows:Section 2 Methodology. This section describes the scope of the model, project terminology and assumptions, the process of technology innovation modelling, industry engagement and the treatment of risk and health and safety.Section 3 Baseline PV plants. This section summarises the parameters in relation to the baseline PVplantsforwhichresultsarepresented.AssumptionsinrelationtothesePVtechnologiesarepresentedinSection2.

ThefollowingfoursectionsconsidereachelementofPVinstallationinturn,exploringtheimpactof innovations on that element.Section 4 Innovations in c-Si PV cell manufacturing. This section incorporates the innovations impactingthePVvaluechainfromthetreatmentofrawmaterialuptomanufacturingofthecells.Section 5 Innovations in c-Si PV module manufacturing. This section incorporates innovations affecting the module manufacturing and encapsulation processes.Section 6 Innovations in TF module technology. This section incorporates innovations affecting TF module manufacturingSection 7 Innovations in inverters. This section incorporates the innovative trends in inverter technology.Section 8 Innovations in operations, maintenance and service. This section incorporates all activities after the works completion date (WCD) until decommissioning.Section 9 Summary of the impact of innovations. This section presents the aggregate impactofallinnovations,exploringtherelativeimpactofinnovationsindifferentPVelements.

Section 10 Conclusions. This section includes technology-related conclusions.

Appendix A Details of methodology. This appendix discusses project assumptions and provides examples of methodology use.Appendix B Data tables. This appendix provides tables of the data behind the figures presented in the report.


2. Methodology2.1. Scope of modelThe basis of the model is a set of baseline elements of capital expenditure (CAPEX),operationalexpenditure(OPEX)andannualenergyproduction(AEP)forarangeofdifferentrepresentative PV Technologies on given Site Types, affected by a range of technologyinnovations. Analyses are conducted at a number of points in time (years of FID), thus describing various potential pathways that the industry could follow, each with an associated LCOE progression.

2.2. Project terminology and assumptions

2.2.1. DefinitionsA detailed set of project assumptions was established prior to the modelling. These are shown inAppendixA,coveringtechnicalandnon-technicalglobalconsiderationsandPVplant-specificparameters.

2.2.2. TerminologyFor the purpose of clarity, when referring to the impact of innovation that lowers costs or the LCOE, terms such as reduction or saving are used, and the changes are quantified as positive numbers. When these reductions are represented graphically or in tables, reductions are expressed as negative numbers as they are intuitively associated with downward trends.

Changes in percentages (for example, losses) are expressed as relative changes. For example, if losses are decreased by 5% from a baseline of 10%, then the resultant losses are 9.5%.

2.3. Technology innovation modellingThe basis of the model is an assessment of the different impact of technology innovations on eachofthePVplantelementsforeachofthebaselinePVplants,asoutlinedinFigure2.1.Thissection describes the methodology for the analysis of each innovation in detail. An example is given in Appendix A.

© Em

ilien S

imon

ot


2.3.1. Maximum technical potential impactEach innovation may impact a range of different costs or operational parameters, as listed in Table 2.1. Themaximumpotential technical impact on each of these is recorded separately for the PVtechnologyandSiteTypemostsuitedtothegiveninnovation.Whererelevantandwherepossible,this maximum technical impact considers timescales that may be well beyond the final year of FID.

Frequently, the potential impact of innovation can be achieved in a number of ways, for example throughreducedCAPEXorOPEXorincreasedAEP.TheanalysisusestheimplementationresultinginthelargestreductionintheLCOE,whichisacombinationofCAPEX,OPEXandAEP.

Table 2.1 Information recorded for each innovation. (%)

Impact on cost of• PV plant modules• PV plant inverters• BoS structures• BoS electrical

Impact on• Gross AEP• Performance Ratio

Figure 2.1 Process to derive the impact of innovations on the LCOE.

Baseline parameters for given project

Revised parameters for given PV plantAnticipated technical impact of innovations for given Technology Type, Site Type and year of FID

Figure 2.2 Four stage moderation process applied to the maximum potential technical impact of an innovation to derive the anticipated impact on LCOE.

Anticipated technical impact for a given Site Type, Technology Type and year of FID

Technical potential impact for a given Site Type, Technology Type and year of FID

Technical potential impact for a given Site Type and Technology Type

Maximum technical potential impact of innovation under best circumstances

Relevance to Site Type and Technology Type

Commercial readiness

Market share

• Development, installation and construction

• PV balance of plant and operation, maintenance and service

17

2.3.2. Relevance to technology TypeThe maximum potential technical impact of an innovation compared with the baseline may not be achieved for every Technology Type. In some cases, an innovation may not be relevant to a given Technology Type at all. For example, seed selection reducing vegetation treatment is unlikely to have an impact on rooftop installations, so the relevance of this innovation to rooftop scenarios is established as 0%. In other cases, the maximum technical potential may only be achieved for some plant types, with a lower technical potential achieved for others. In this way, relevance indicators for a given Technology Type may be between zero and 100% with, at least one Technology Type having 100% relevance.

This relevance is modelled by applying a factor specific to each Technology Type independently foreachinnovation.ThefactorforagivenSiteTypeandTechnologyTypecombinationisapplieduniformly to each of the potential technical effects derived above.

2.3.3. Commercial readinessIn some cases, the technical potential of a given innovation will not be fully achieved even on a project reaching FID in 2030. This may be for a number of reasons:

•Alongresearch,developmentanddemonstrationperiodforaninnovation,•Thetechnicalpotentialcanonlybeachievedthroughtheongoingevolutionof thedesign

based on feedback from commercial-scale manufacturing and operations, or•Thepotentialtechnicalimpactofoneinnovationisdecreasedbythesubsequentintroduction

of another innovation.

This commercial readiness is modelled by defining a factor for each innovation specific to each year of FID, defining how much of the technical potential of the innovation is available to projects reaching FID in that year. If the figure is 100%, this means that the full technical potential will be achieved by the given year of FID. The factor relates to how much of the technical potential is commercially ready for deployment in a project of the scale defined in the baseline.

2.3.4. Market shareEach innovation is assigned a market share for each Technology Type and year of FID. This is the market share of an innovation for a given Technology Type for projects reaching FID in a given year; it is not the market share of the innovation across the whole market that consists of a range of projects with different Technology Types.

The resulting anticipated impact of a given innovation, as this takes into account the anticipated market share on a given Technology Type in a given year of FID, can be combined with the anticipated impact of all other innovations to give an overall anticipated impact for a given Technology Type and year of FID. At this stage, the impact of a given innovation is still calculated in terms of its anticipated impact on each capital, operational and energy-related parameter, as listed in Table 2.1.

These impacts are then applied to the baseline costs and operational parameters to derive the impact of each innovation on LCOE for each Technology Type and year of FID, using a generic weighted average cost of capital (WACC).

The aggregated impact of all innovations on each operational and energy-related parameter in Table 2.1 is also derived, enabling a technology-only LCOE to be derived for each Technology Type and FID year combination.



2.4. Treatment of other effectsIn order to derive a real-world LCOE, this technology-only LCOE is factored to account for the impact of various other effects, defined for each combination of Technology Type and year of FID as follows:•Scenario-specificWACC,takingintoaccountrisk(orcontingency)•Transmission fees,covering transmissioncapitalandoperatingcostsandcharges related tothe infrastructure from input to substation to the transmission network for utility scale PVinstallations, or connection fees for rooftop and distributed applications.

•Supplychaindynamics,simplifyingtheimpactofthesupplychainleverssuchascompetition,collaboration and scale effects.

•TheriskthatsomeprojectsmaybeterminatedpriortoFID,therebyinflatingtheequivalentcost of work carried out in this phase on a project that has been constructed. For example, if only one in three projects reach FID, then the effective contribution to the cost of work energy carried out on projects prior to FID is modelled as three times the actual cost for successful projects, and

•Decommissioningcosts,asdescribedinAppendixA.

A factor for each of these effects was obtained from the KIC InnoEnergy technology strategy and workstream roadmap published in July 2014 and the expert consultation taking place afterwards.

The factors are applied as follows:•Scenario-specificWACCisusedinplaceofthegenericWACCtocalculatearevisedLCOE,and•EachfactorisappliedinturntothisLCOEtoderivethereal-worldWACC,thatis,a5%effectto

account for transmission costs (the first factor in Table A.4) is applied as a factor of 1.05.

These factors are kept separate from the impact of technology innovations in order to clearly identify the impact of innovations, but they are needed in order to be able to rationally compare LCOE for different scenarios.

The effects of changes in construction time are not modelled.

2.5. Treatment of health, safety and environmental impactsThe health and safety of operational staff is of primary importance in the solar photovoltaic industry. This study incorporates any mitigation required in order to at least preserve existing levelsofhealthandsafetyintothecostofinnovations.Someoftheinnovationsconsideredtoreduce LCOE over time have an intrinsic benefit to health and safety performance, for example the increased reliability of equipment and plant monitoring/remote diagnostics, which provide a more effective and proactive service and hence reduce tasks and time spent working on the installation.

19

3.BaselinePVinstallationsThemodellingprocessdescribedinSection2servesto:•DefineasetofPVinstallationsandderivecostsandenergy-relatedparametersforeach,•DerivetheanticipatedimpactonthesesameparametersforeachbaselinePVinstallationsfor

a given year of FID for each of a range of innovations, and•Combinetheimpactofarangeofinnovationstoderivecostsandenergy-relatedparametersforeachofthebaselinePVinstallationsforeachyearofFID.

ThissectionsummarisesthecostsandotherparametersforthebaselinePVinstallations.Thebaselinesweredeveloped froma reviewof current trends inPV installations in combinationwith industry engagement. The technical parameters of the baseline PV installations aredetailed in Appendix A.

It is recognised that there is significant variability in costs between projects due to both supply chainandtechnologicaleffects,evenwithintheportfolioofagivenPVplantdeveloper.Thisis particularly true for solar photovoltaics where local supply chain development, financing conditions,sitetopographyandregionalcustomsandpracticesinPVplantdevelopmentandoperation can vary significantly. As such, any baseline represents a wide spectrum of potential costs and it is accepted that there will be actual projects in operation with LCOEs significantly higher and lower than those associated with these baselines.

The baseline costs presented in Table 3.1, Figure 3.1 and Figure 3.2 are values obtained from cost data currently available from recent studies or reports and are for projects reaching FID in 2015. As such, they incorporate reasonable margins to all value added steps along the value chain without distortion. All the results presented in this report incorporate the impact of technology innovationsonly,exceptwheretheLCOEsarepresentedinFigure3.3andinSection9,whichalsoincorporatetheothereffectsdiscussedinSection2.4.

It is assumed that efficiencies of 15.5% for crystalline silicon, 17.5% for high efficiency crystalline silicon and 13.5% for thin films are commercially available to the market for projects with FID in 2015. “Commercially available” means that it is technically possible to use such technology in

© Em

ilien S

imon

ot

20

volume and that they have been sufficiently prototyped and demonstrated to have a reasonable prospect of sale into a commercial scale project. No assumptions are made in this report about the market share of one specific technology compared with the another.

Table 3.1 Baseline parameters.

Type Parameter Units Conv c-Si Conv c-Si HighEff c-Si HighEff c-Si TF TF Ground-15 Roof-15 Ground-15 Roof-15 Ground-15 Roof-15

CAPEX Modules €k/MW 576 604.8 722 758.1 481 505.05

Inverters 65 188 65 188 65 188

BoS structures 63 130 56 115 73 130

BoS electrical 11 300 10 266 13 300

Dev. Constr & installation 164 95 145 95 188 95

OPEX Operation and maintenance €k/MW/yr 19 20 19 20 19 20

Other OPEX 12 - 12 - 14 -

AEP Gross AEP MWh/yr/MW 1,656 1,718 1,618 1,678 1,637 1,1658

Losses (1-PR) % 20.3 23.2 18.4 21.3 19.4 20.4

Net AEP MWh/yr/MW 1,320 1,320 1,320 1,320 1,320 1,320

Net Capacity Factor % 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1


Figure 3.1 Baseline CAPEX by element.

€k/MW

1.500

1.250

1.000

750

500

250

0Conv c-Si

Ground-15HighEff c-SiGround-15

Conv c-SiRoof-15

HighEff c-SiRoof-15

TFGround-15

TFRoof-15

•Modules •Inverters •BoS structures •BoS electrical •Dev. Constr & instalation


Future renewable energy costs: solar photovoltaics


Notethatforrooftopinstallations,theotherOPEXisequaltozero.Thiselementmainlyreferstoleasing of land. This value is derived from the assumption that the rooftop installation has been installed and owned by the owner of the building.

The timing profile of CAPEX and OPEX spent, which is important in deriving the LCOE, ispresented in Appendix A.

Thesebaselineparametersareused toderive theLCOE for thebaselinePV installations.AcomparisonoftherelativeLCOEforeachofthebaselinePVinstallationsispresentedinFigure 3.3.

Atthistime,Conventionalc-SiprovidesthelowestLCOEofthethreeTechnologyTypes.HighEfficiency c-Simaypresent anoptimised cost structurewith lowerBoS costs, but it alsohasthe highest module CAPEX costs. TF plants are the cheapest in terms of CAPEX, but theirsignificantly lowerpoweroutput(lowerefficiency)raisestheLCOEabovethe levelofSilicon-based technologies.

Figure 3.2 Baseline OPEX and net capacity factor.

OPEX (€k/MW/yr) and CF (%)

40

30

20

10

0Conv c-Si

Ground-15HighEff c-SiGround-15

Conv c-SiRoof-15

HighEff c-SiRoof-15

TFGround-15

TFRoof-15

•Operation and maintenance •Other OPEX •Net Capacity Factor



Figure 3.3 Relative LCOE and net capacity factor for baseline PV installations with other effects incorporated (Ref.Section2.4).

%

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0Conv c-Si

Ground-15Conv c-SiRoof-15

HighEff c-SiGround-15

HighEff c-SiRoof-15

TFGround-15

TFRoof-15


•LCOE as % of Conv cSi-Ground-15% •Net Capacity Factor

Methodology note on emerging PV technologies

The cell technology development within the PV sector goes far beyond the threetechnologiesmentionedinthisreport:Conventionalc-Si,HighEfficiencyc-SiandTF.OthertechnologytrendsexistforPVmodules,principallybasedontheuseofdifferenttypesofmaterialand innovativeconcepts:organicPV,perovskites,dyesensitised,quantumdots,etc.andforspecificapplicationssuchasCPV,BIPVorportablePVapplications.InthisreportthemethodologyusedisbasedonthestudyofPVinstallationsusingtechnologythatisalready well established in the market and commercially available. “Commercially available” means that it is technically possible to use such technology in volume and that it has been sufficiently prototyped and demonstrated in order to have a reasonable prospect of sale into a commercial scale project as defined in this study.

23

4.Innovationsinc-SiPVcellmanufacturing4.1. OverviewInnovations inPVcellmanufacturingareanticipatedtoreducetheLCOEby14%and17%forConventionalcSi technologyandaround22% forHighEfficiencyc-SibetweenFID2015and2030. The savings are dominated by important improvements in the efficiency of the module thatwillinturnaffecttootherPVinstallationelementsincludingCAPEXandOPEX.

Figure4.1showsthat the impactonCAPEXandLCOE isgreatest forPV installationsusingHighEfficiencyc-Sitechnology.Thisisbecausemanyofthemostsignificantinnovationsinthisareaareonlyanticipatedtobeappliedtoemergingtechnologies.TheConventionalcSitechnologyprimarilybenefits from evolutionary changes to current practice and hence shows smaller improvements.

Figure 4.1 Anticipated impact of PV cell manufacturing innovations by Technology Type with FID in 2030, compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015.

Impact on CAPEX

0% -10% -20% -30% -40%

Tech Conv HighEff

Impact on OPEX

0% -2% -4% -6% -8%

Tech Conv HighEff

Impact on net AEP

4% 3% 2% 1% 0%

Tech Conv HighEff

Impact on LCOE

0% -5% -10% -15% -20%

Tech Conv HighEff


© iS

tock


Figure 4.2 to Figure 4.3 and Table 4.1 to Table 4.2 show that the individual innovations with the largest anticipated impact by FID 2030 are mainly incremental innovations in relation to existing processes or manufacturing techniques. New concepts and technologies present high potential impact but their anticipated low market penetration will limit the advantage of these benefits by 2030.

4.1.1. Conventional cSi

Figure 4.2 Anticipated and potential impact of PV cell manufacturing innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using conventional c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.

Improvement for Si material feedstock, FBR and metallurgical silicon

Improvement in silicon crystallisation

Innovations in wafering

Devel. Si-based tandem architectures including devel. of a wide-bandgap TF top cell

Back contact cell structures

Improvement of existing HJ & new generation of cell HJ design

Bifacial cells

Advanced existing Homojunction technologies

Impact on LCOE

• Anticipated impact FID 2030 • Maximum technical potential impact Source: KIC InnoEnergy

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Table 4.1 Anticipated and potential impact of PV cell manufacturing innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using conventional c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.

Innovation Maximum technical potential impact Anticipated impact FID 2030 CAPEX OPEX AEP LCOE CAPEX OPEX AEP LCOE

Improvement for Si material feedstock, FBR and metallurgical silicon 4.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 3.2% 0.0% 0.0% 2.1%

Improvement in silicon crystallisation 3.1% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4%

Innovations in wafering 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.7% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0%

Development of Si-based tandem architectures including the development of a wide-bandgap TF top cell 18.9% 13.2% 0.0% 16.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Back contact cell structures 16.7% 9.2% 2.2% 16.0% 0.8% 0.5% 0.1% 0.8%

Improvement of existing heterojunction & new generation of cell heterojunction design 18.2% 9.2% 2.8% 17.3% 1.8% 0.9% 0.3% 1.8%

Bifacial cells 17.3% 7.2% 2.8% 16.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Advanced existing Homojunction technologies 17.3% 7.2% 1.4% 14.9% 8.6% 3.6% 0.7% 7.5%



4.1.2. High Efficiency c-Si

Figure 4.3 Anticipated and potential impact of PV cell manufacturing innovations for a rooftop PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.

Improvement for Si material feedstock, FBR and metallurgical silicon

Improvement in silicon crystallisation


Devel. Si-based tandem architectures including devel. of a wide-bandgap TF top cell


Improvement of existing HJ & new generation of cell HJ design

Bifacial cells

Advanced existing Homojunction technologies

Impact on LCOE


0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Table 4.2 Anticipated and potential impact of PV cell manufacturing innovations for a rooftop PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.


Improvement for Si material feedstock, FBR and metallurgical silicon 4.4% 0.0% 0.0% 3.0% 3.5% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4%

Improvement in silicon crystallisation 3.4% 0.0% 0.0% 2.3% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6%

Innovations in wafering 2.8% 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 1.8% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3%

Development of Si-based tandem architectures including the development of a wide-bandgap TF top cell 19.3% 13.2% 0.0% 17.4% 1.3% 0.9% 0.0% 1.2%

Back contact cell structures 17.2% 9.1% 2.0% 16.3% 3.8% 2.0% 0.4% 3.6%

Improvement of existing heterojunction & new generation of cell heterojunction design 18.8% 9.1% 2.4% 17.7% 5.6% 2.7% 0.7% 5.4%

Bifacial cells 18.1% 7.1% 2.4% 16.7% 1.4% 0.5% 0.2% 1.3%

Advanced existing Homojunction technologies 18.1% 7.1% 1.2% 15.7% 5.6% 2.2% 0.4% 4.9%



4.2. InnovationsInnovations in PV cellmanufacturing span a range of processes from the treatment of rawmaterial to the development of new cell architecture. A subset of the more important of these has been modelled here.

Improvements for Si material feedstock, FBR and metallurgical silicon

Practice today: Nowadays,polysiliconmaterialisobtainedmainlythroughtheSiemensProcess.Although this technique is under constant improvement, it is highly electricity consuming and theCAPEXisveryhigh.Innovation: Improvement will involve silicon purification using alternative methods to the Siemens Process. There are twomain alternativeways, the Fluidised BedReactors(FBR),ontheonehand,andmetallurgicalsolargradesiliconontheother.Bothtechniquesare much more energy efficient and could also allow for substantial reduction in the manufacturing process with lower cost of equipment and better manpower optimisation neededforsiliconpurification,overallaffectingthemodule’sCAPEX.Bothtechniquesarebeingimplementedatthedemonstrationandpre-commercial levels.Still, thecapacitytoreachthesamepurificationlevelsastheonesobtainedwiththeSiemensProcessmustbe demonstrated.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all sites and Technology Types using silicon as raw material.Commercial readiness: About one third of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, achieving full readiness (100%) for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be about a 40% of projects with FID in 2020. This is anticipated to rise to 80% for projects with FID in 2030.

Improvements in silicon crystallisation

Practice today: Casting for multi-crystalline silicon and Czochralsky for mono-crystalline are themainstreamprocessesforsiliconcrystallisation.Botharehighlyelectricityconsumingandrequire long preparation time (for charge and discharge). The losses of raw material mixed with impurities around the edges are significant. The casting technology presents issues related to uniformity along the bricks.Innovation: The continuous improvement of those techniques allows an increase in the yield together with a reduction in electricity needs, process timing and material losses, all in all impactingonCAPEX.On topof that, thenormalisationof theuseof reusablecrucibleswith lower impurities lead to furtherCAPEX reduction. Beside, improvementsinfloatzonewillleadtohigherpurityanduniformityatlowercostsandtosubstantiallyhigher efficiencies.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all sites and Technology Types using silicon as raw material.Commercial readiness: About one third of the benefit of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to full readiness (100%) for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be about a half of projects with FID in 2020. This is anticipated to rise to 70% for projects with FID in 2030.



Practice today: Current mainstream wafering techniques use wire saw equipment, cleaning processes and sorting and testing systems. The main issues to be addressed are Kerf losses, process control, wafer handling and the mitigation of defects.Innovation: Wafering technique improvement seek to improve wafer handling, process control and reduce kerf loss in sawing (reduction of wire diameter and sawing pitch) such as the direct wafering method based on epitaxial lift-off. The objective is to aim at thinner and ultra-thin wafers (down to 100 microns) for advanced cell architecture. 100µm wafers are already possible today but the adaptation of cell and laminate processes still has to be improved. All these optimisations lead to module cost reduction. On top of that, the process improvement for fewer defects and high electronic silicon wafers (defects management) which lead to improved efficiency.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all sites and Technology Types using silicon as raw material.Commercial readiness: About one third of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, achieving full readiness (100%) for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be about 30% of projects with FID in 2020. This is anticipated to rise to 60% for projects with FID in 2030.

Development of Si-based tandem architectures including the developmentof a wide-bandgap TF top cell

Practice today:CurrentSi-basedsolarcellsinthemarketaresingle-junctiondevices,meaningthat only one absorber material is used. This results is inevitable transmission and thermalisation losses due to the characteristic bandgap of the material. Further optimisation potential for single-junction cells exists. However, theoretical calculations lead to an upper efficiency limit of 29.4%forc-Sicellsalthoughthepracticallimitmightbecloserto27%.Innovation: Greater efficiency can be achieved through tandem structures, in which two solar cells with different band gaps are stacked. Each solar cell is optimised for a different part of the solar spectrum, thus reducing transmission and thermalisation losses. A promising concept is to useaSi-basedbottomcellwithahighbandgapsolarcellontop.Forthetopcells,Perovskites,III-Vmaterials or Si quantumdots are interesting options. The impact of said improvementsin efficiency will lead to CAPEX reduction at the module level and by scale effect to BoS,construction,OPEXandlosses.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all sites and Technology Types using silicon as raw material.Commercial readiness: 10% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 40% for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 1% for projects using High Efficiency c-Sitechnology with FID in 2020. This is then anticipated to rise to 17% for those projects with FID in 2030.


Practice today: StandardSi solarcellshavea full-areametalcontacton thebackandmetalcontacts (fingers and bus bars) on the front side. Contacts on the front side lead to shading losses as light falling on the contacts does not enter the absorbent layers of the solar cell.


Innovation: Novel solar cell structures allow both contacts to be on the back of the solar cell, whichreducesshadinglossesandincreasesmoduleefficiencyaffectingCAPEXandOPEXandreducing losses. In some approaches only the busbars are moved to the back (e.g. metal wrap through (MWT)) while others also place the fingers on the back (e.g. emitter wrap through (EWT) andinterdigitatedbackcontactcells(IBC)).Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all sites and Technology Types using silicon as a raw material.Commercial readiness: About two thirds of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 100% for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 1% for projects using Conventional c-Sitechnologyand10% for thoseusingHighEfficiencyc-Si technologywithFID in2020.This isthen anticipated to adjust to 10% and around 22% respectively for projects with FID in 2030.

Improvement of existing heterojunction & new generation ofcell heterojunction design

Practice today: In conventional Silicon solar cells a large proportion of charge carrierrecombination takes place at the surface. Dielectric passivation layers can reduce the recombinationrates(e.g.PERC),however,surfacerecombinationwillstillplayamajorrole.Innovation: An advanced approach to reducing recombination at metal semiconductor interfaces is in the application of heterojunction. For example, a wider band gap semiconductor layer canbedepositedon thec-Sibase.Oneoption for suchamaterial is thedepositingofamorphous silicon.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all sites and Technology Types using High-Efficiency silicon only.Commercial readiness: About half to two thirds of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 100% for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 2% for projects using Conventional c-Sitechnologyand20%forinstallationswithHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologywithFIDin2020.Thisis then anticipated to rise to 20% and 30% respectively for projects with FID in 2030.

Bifacial cells

Practice today: State-of-the-artsiliconsolarcellshaveabacksheetthatcoversthecompleteback side of the cell. Hence light can only enter the front of the solar cell.Innovation:Bifacialsolarcellsallowlighttoenterthefrontandthebacksides.Insteadofafullback contact they typically employ a front surface design similar to that used in industry-standard screen-printed solar cells, with the major difference being the structure of the rear surface contact.Ratherthancovertheentirebacksurfacewithareflectivealuminiumcontact,a‘finger’grid is used in its place in order to allow sunlight through the rear. This feature increases the efficiency of the cellwhich leads to reducedCAPEXpermodule, BoS and construction andOPEX,aswellasreducedloss.Relevance: The innovation is 20% relevant for conventional silicon technology while fully relevant for high efficiency technology in ground mounted large PV installations. Whenconsidering rooftop installations, relevance drops to 5%.Commercial readiness: About half of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 75% for projects with FID in 2030.

29

Market share: MarketshareisanticipatedtobenegligibleforprojectsusingConventionalc-Siand4%forHighEfficiencyc-SiwithFIDin2020.Thisisthenanticipatedtoriseto2%and10%respectively for projects with FID in 2030.

Advanced existing homojunction technologies

Practice today: TheworkhorseofthePVindustryhasbeenthescreen-printedAl-BSFcellonp-type silicon. It has an aluminium rear contact, leading to moderate passivation of the back side (back-surfacefield,BSF). The front typicallyhas screen-printedAgcontacts, ananti-reflectivecoating and a pyramid structure for light guiding. The device has been improved over the years through evolutionary steps, like improved metal pastes and printing processes, better front surface passivation and optimised emitter layers.Innovation: ThelimitingfactoroftheAl-BSFcellisthecarrierrecombinationonthefrontandback.Inaddition,theinternalreflectiononthebackiscomparablylow.Advancedhomojunctiontechnologiesthereforeincludeimprovedpassivationontheback(e.g.partialrearcontact,PRC)oronthefrontandrearside(PERC,PERL,LBSF,PERT).Severaloftheseapproachesarealreadyinthe advanced stages of development or even already on the market. These concepts imply the implementation of new production methods the cost of which is offset by increased efficiency at themodule level which, all in all, leads to amodule CAPEX improvement affecting BoS,construction,OPEXandlosses.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all sites and Technology Types using silicon as raw material.Commercial readiness: About half of the benefit of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 100% for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 40% for projects using Conventional c-Sitechnologyand45%forprojectsusingHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologywithFIDin2020.Thisisthenanticipatedtoriseto50%forprojectusingConventionalc-Sitechnologyandfallto31%forprojectsusingHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030.


31

5.Innovationsinc-SiPVmodule manufacturing5.1. OverviewInnovationsintheareaofPVmodulemanufacturingareanticipatedtoreducetheLCOEbyaround2.5%betweenFID2015and2030forConventionalc-Siand4%forHighEfficiencyc-Si.ThesavingsaredominatedbyimprovementsinCAPEX,andadditionallysavingsarealsonotablewithinOPEX.

Figure5.1showsthattheimpactonCAPEX,OPEXandLCOEisverymuchsimilarforConventionalc-Si andHighEfficiencyc-Si technologies. This isdue to the fact that innovations inmoduleproduction mostly apply equally to both technologies.

Figure 5.2 to Figure 5.3 and Table 5.1 to Table 5.2 show that the innovation anticipated to have thebiggest impactforbothConventionalc-SiandHighEfficiencyc-Si isthe improvementof

Figure 5.1 Anticipated impact of PV module manufacturing innovations by Technology Type with FID in 2030, compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015.

Impact on CAPEX

0% -2% -4% -6% -8%

Tech Conv HighEff

Impact on OPEX

0% -0.1% -0.2% -0.3% -0.4%

Tech Conv HighEff

Impact on net AEP

4% 3% 2% 1% 0%

Tech Conv HighEff

Impact on LCOE

0% -1% -2% -3% -4%

Tech Conv HighEff


© iS

tock


framingandespecially the frameless technology thatwill allow interestingCAPEX reductionthrough savings in material.

5.1.1. Conventional c-Si

Table 5.1 Anticipated and potential impact of PV module manufacturing innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using Conventional c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.


Test for defect characterisation: on line defect characterization and control in silicon module 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2%

Advanced ageing simulation & improved energy yield modeling 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Advanced connections for ultra-thin cells 0.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1%

New cell dimensions and sizes 0.3% 0.7% 0.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

New front cover material 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2%

Innovative backsheet material 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 1.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7%

Innovative framing, frameless concepts 2.8% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6%

New encapsulation material 0.4% 0.7% 0.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%


Figure 5.2 Anticipated and potential impact of PV module manufacturing innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using Conventional c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.

Test for defect characterisation: on line defect characterization and control in silicon module

Advanced ageing simulation & improved energy yield modeling

Advanced connections for ultra-thin cells

New cell dimensions and sizes

New front cover material

Innovative backsheet material

Innovative framing. frameless concepts

New encapsulation material

Impact on LCOE


0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%



Table 5.2 Anticipated and potential impact of PV module manufacturing innovations for a rooftop PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.


Test for defect characterisation: on line defect characterization and control in silicon module 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2%

Advanced ageing simulation & improved energy yield modeling 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Advanced connections for ultra-thin cells 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4%

New cell dimensions and sizes 0.3% 0.7% 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

New front cover material 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2%

Innovative backsheet material 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% 1.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8%

Innovative framing, frameless concepts 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.1% 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.9%

New encapsulation material 0.4% 0.7% 0.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%


Figure 5.3 Anticipated and potential impact of PV module manufacturing innovations for a rooftop PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.

Test for defect characterisation: on line defect characterization and control in silicon module

Advanced ageing simulation & improved energy yield modeling


New cell dimensions and sizes


Innovative backsheet material

Innovative framing. frameless concepts


Impact on LCOE


0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5%


5.2. InnovationsInnovationsinPVmodulemanufacturingareprimarilyfocusedonthedifferentcomponentsofthe module and on the techniques to evaluate quality in the production process.

Tests for defect characterization: on line defect characterisationand control in silicon module

Practice today: In module manufacturing, the detection of defects and failures usually happens attheendoftheproductionlinewhenthemodulesaretested(IVcurve).Togetherwithquality,running such detection techniques at the end of the manufacturing chain means considerable costs when the modules are rejected.Innovation: Integration of high throughput and controls for industrial processing and quality assurance during production will reduce costs, increase the manufacturing yield and reduce the quality risks, assuring performance and reducing the emergence of these defects and failures in the installations. This innovation basically combines a necessary characterisation of these defects and development and implementation of control during production. Examples of said techniques are: EL tests, hot spot tests and new production line tests for quality assurance before lamination.Relevance: The innovation is equally relevant to all Technology Types using silicon as raw material.Commercial readiness: About 25% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 100% for projects with FID in 2030.Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 20% for projects with FID in 2020. For projects with FID in 2030, the market share is anticipated to rise to 70%.

Advanced ageing simulation & improved energy yield modelling

Practice today: It is currently well-accepted that the lifetime of silicon modules is at least 25 years – provided quality materials and good workmanship are employed. Within this lifetime it is also accepted that there will be degradation in the modules affecting the efficiency and therefore the performance of the PV system, but exact figures for this degradation are notknown. Manufacturers give warranties ensuring degradation of less than 10% after 10 years and less than 20% after 20 years. These values are based on the existing experience gained with real modules producing energy for more than 30 years. Nevertheless, these modules were tested under different conditions and with different equipment than those available today. This makes it difficult to make consistent comparisons.Innovation: It is extremely important to know the behaviour of the modules, lifetime and degradationwithaccuracytoknowinadvancewhattheperformanceofaPVsystemovertimewill be. This can be done through advanced ageing simulation to better understand degradation mechanisms and real lifetime up to a minimum of 30 years. All in all, this innovation allows for better understanding of the losses during module lifetime and more generally, the modules’ behaviour over their lifetime (performance, degradation, losses, etc.). This could affect the designoftheinstallationsatsomepointmeaningsomeimprovementinCAPEX.Othereffectson bankability (WACC reduction) or similar are not modelled here.Relevance: The innovation is equally relevant to all Technology Types using silicon as raw material.Commercial readiness: About 25% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 100% for projects with FID in 2030.Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 20% for projects with FID in 2020. For projects with FID in 2030, the market share is anticipated to rise to 70%.

35


Practice today: PVmodulemetallisationnormallyincludesacertainnumberofbusbars,usually3. The busbars are responsible for the power collection from the cells but at the same time generate shading losses affecting the efficiency of the module.Innovation: The trends in metallisation are towards the reduction of the photosensitive area covered by the metallisation. This is achieved by increasing the number of busbars, 4 to 5, and reducing their dimensions. Further techniques suggest directly eliminating said busbars and developing so-called busbarless designs such as multi-wire concept. Overall, this innovation will allowlowercelltomoduleefficiencylosses.ThemainimpactwouldbeinrelationtoCAPEX,obtained through increased efficiency and thanks to the savings in materials, all this implying that new metallisation techniques are more cost-efficient.Relevance: The relevance of this innovation for traditional silicon technology is 40% while it is fully relevant for high-efficiency silicon technology.Commercial readiness: About 30% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 70% for projects with FID in 2030.Market share: Market share is anticipated to be around 70% for projects with FID in 2020. For projects with FID in 2030, the market share is anticipated to rise to 80%.

New cell dimension and size

Practice today: Today standard cell size is a square of 6 inches by 6 inches.Innovation: Using half-sized cells will impact at the module level, with some variation in module dimensions on the one hand, but especially with much lower cell current allowing for a reduction in metallisation. A modelled increase in production costs coupled with a reduction in theuseofmaterialwillleadtoanoverallreductionofCAPEXandincreasedefficiencyresultinginrelativeCAPEXoptimisationinBoSandOPEX.Relevance: The innovation is equally relevant to all Technology Types using silicon as raw material.Commercial readiness: About 10% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 50% for projects with FID in 2030.Market share: As an emerging technology it is considered that the market penetration for projects with FID 2020 will be negligible, rising to a 10% market share for projects with FID in 2030


Practice today: The vast majority of manufacturers use a traditional glass front cover using anti reflectivecoatedglasswithathicknessof3.2mm.Innovation: The innovation basically consists of the development of the use of thinner glass, in the range of 2mm and even 1.5mm, which could achieve lower prices than the existingonesleadingtoareductioninCAPEXandresultinginbettertransmittanceleadingto greater efficiency.Relevance: The innovation is equally relevant to all Technology Types using silicon as raw material.Commercial readiness: About 70% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 50% for projects with FID in 2030.Market share: As glass use is standardised, it is considered that the market penetration for projects with FID 2020 will be set to 80% and market share for projects with FID in 2030 will rise to 100%.



Innovative backsheet materials

Practice today: ThecurrentbacksheetmarketisdominatedbyTPAandPETmaterials.Innovation: Innovations will come in most cases through the improvement of the existing materials, basically decreasing costs and improving the reliability thereof. Aside from this, another option is to replace traditional backsheets with glass to develop the so called “glass-glass” modules, resulting in a positive impact on CAPEX through cost reduction and thecorresponding increase in module efficiency in turn affecting the rest of the installation.Relevance: The innovation is equally relevant to all Technology Types using silicon as raw material.Commercial readiness: About 65% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 80% for projects with FID in 2030.Market share: It is considered that the market penetration for projects with FID 2020 will be set to 80% and market share for projects with FID in 2030 will rise to 100%.

Innovative framing, frameless concepts

Practice today: Aluminium frames are mainstream technology to seal and protect the perimeter of modules.Innovation: The innovation principally consists of improved frameless techniques that dramatically reduce the use of material without affecting the module lifetime. The impact on CAPEX is straightforward. It isconsidered that this innovation isnot fully suitable for rooftopapplications as it may require too much care in the module handling.Relevance: The innovation is equally relevant to all Technology Types using silicon as raw material.ThereisadifferencebetweengroundmountedPVinstallationswherethisinnovationis expected to be 100% relevant compared with rooftop installations where the relevance will only reach 40%.Commercial readiness: About 80% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 100% for projects with FID in 2030.Market share: It is considered that the market penetration for projects with FID 2020 will be set to 80% and market share for projects with FID in 2030 will raise to 100%.


Practice today: EVAisthecurrentmainstreamencapsulationmaterialwithaveryhighmarketshare.Innovation: Severalmaterialshavebeenshowntopresentinterestingcharacteristicsthatcouldreplace EVA. Beyond these, theone analysedhere is silicone as an innovative encapsulationmaterial. The main anticipated benefits of silicone are linked to easier treatment involving substantially lower amounts of electricity and the potential to generate some efficiency improvementscomparedwithEVA.TheseeffectsresultinCAPEXreductions.Relevance: The innovation is equally relevant to all Technology Types using silicon as raw material.Commercial readiness: About 20% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 50% for projects with FID in 2030.Market share: It is considered that the market penetration for projects with FID 2020 will be set to 3% and market share for projects with FID in 2030 will rise to 10%.

37

6. Innovation in TF module technology6.1. OverviewInnovations in TF modules are anticipated to reduce the LCOE by around 25% for TF technology between FID 2015 and 2030. The savings are dominated by important improvements in efficiency of themodule thatwill in turn affect other PV installation elements includingCAPEXandOPEX.

Figure4.1showsthattheimpactonCAPEXisthegreatestcontributortotheLCOEreductionfor PV installations using TF technology. This impact comes togetherwith an importantincreaseinefficiencythatwillhaveacascadeeffectonallprojectelementswithinCAPEXandOPEX.

© Fi

umici

no PV

- Pa

olo V.

Chian

tore

Figure 6.1 Anticipated impact of TF module innovations with FID in 2030, compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015.

Impact on CAPEX

0% -10% -20% -30% -40%

Tech TF

Impact on OPEX

0% -2% -4% -6% -8%

Tech TF

Impact on net AEP

4% 3% 2% 1% 0%

Tech TF

Impact on LCOE

0% -10% -20% -30% -40%

Tech TF



Figure 6.2 and Table 6.1 show that the individual innovations with the largest anticipated impact by FID 2030 are mainly incremental innovations of existing processes or manufacturing techniques. New and alternative concepts present high potential impact but their anticipated limited commercial readiness and low market penetration are obstacles to taking advantage of those benefits by 2030.

6.2. Innovations

Figure 6.2 Anticipated and potential impact of TF module innovations for a ground mounted PV installation using TF technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.

Improved deposition techniques

Alternative absorber materials

Development and integration of quality control methods

Improved light management

Reduce efficiency gap Lab cells-Fab modules

Increase module efficiency

Mitigation of degradation mechanisms

New module materials

Impact on LCOE


0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Table 6.1 Anticipated and potential impact of TF module innovations for a ground mounted PV installation using TF technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.


Improved deposition techniques 4.5% 2.0% 0.0% 3.5% 3.6% 1.6% 0.0% 2.8%

Alternative absorber materials 13.3% 5.2% 0.0% 10.2% 1.3% 0.5% 0.0% 1.0%

Development and integration of quality control methods 3.5% 0.0% 0.0% 2.2% 3.5% 0.0% 0.0% 2.2%

Improved light management 10.6% 0.0% 0.0% 6.5% 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8%

Reduce efficiency gap Lab cells-Fab modules 10.8% 2.2% 0.0% 7.5% 9.7% 2.0% 0.0% 6.8%

Increase module efficiency 10.8% 2.2% 0.0% 7.5% 8.7% 1.7% 0.0% 6.0%

Mitigation of degradation mechanisms 0.0% 1.7% 3.7% 4.2% 0.0% 1.4% 3.0% 3.4%

New module materials 3.5% 0.0% 0.0% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Source: KIC InnoEnergy

39

InnovationsinPVcellmanufacturingspanarangeofprocessesfromthetreatmentoftherawmaterial to the development of new cell architecture. A subset of the more important of these has been modelled here.

Improved deposition techniques

Practice today: There is still a big gap in efficiency between small-area lab cells and large-area industrialmodulesforbothCIGSandCdTetechnology.Onereasonforthisarethehomogeneityproblems of large-area deposition tools/processes currently used which result in varying properties of the layers which in turn leads to lower module efficiencies. This limits the size of modules that can currently be produced at high efficiency.Innovation: By improving deposition techniques, functional layers with optimal propertiescan be deposited homogeneously on larger areas leading to greater efficiency and allowing largermoduleareastobedeveloped.ThiswillimprovethroughputwhichwillleadtoaCAPEXreductionformoduleswithacascadeeffectonBoSandOPEXRelevance: The innovation is relevant for all TF Technology Types.Commercial readiness: About 20% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 80% for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be as high as 80% for projects with FID in 2020. This is then anticipated to rise to 100% for projects with FID in 2030.

Alternative absorber materials

Practice today: Currently the main absorber materials used in industry for thin film modules are CIGSandCdTe.ThemainalternativesbeinginvestigatedareCZTS(kesterites)andperovskites.Themaximumlabefficienciesobtainedforthesetechnologiesforsmallcellsare~11%(CZTS)and ~20% (perovskites),Innovation: The absorber material in commercial TF modules is replaced by the new absorber material (mentioned above), leading to greater efficiency and/or lower production costs. Moreover, scarce elements such as Te and In should not be used in these novel materials, allowing formuch lower limitations for thedeploymentof said technologies. TheCAPEXofmodules will be reduced thanks to the use of cheaper material and will also be affected by increasedefficiency,inturnaffectingBoSandOPEX.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all TF Technology Types.Commercial readiness: About 10% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 40% for projects with FID in 2030Market share: This innovation will not affect the market of projects with FID in 2020. This is then anticipated to rise to 25% for projects with FID in 2030.

Development and integration of quality control methods

Practice today: As with crystalline silicon technologies, quality control usually takes place at the end of the manufacturing process.Innovation: The development and integration of improved control methods that may provide information on separate processes to improve the quality evaluation during the manufacturing process. The main trends are looking at the following techniques: in situ quality control during production, non-destructive methods, optical, etc. The aim is to increase yield and then reduce



CAPEX.Note that the improvementof qualitymay also affect other parameters such as theWACC although this is not modelled here.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all TF Technology Types.Commercial readiness: About 40% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 100% for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 75% for projects with FID in 2020. This is then anticipated to rise to 100% for projects with FID in 2030.

Improved light management

Practice today: Currently,CIGSandCdTemodulesdonotuseadvancedlighttrappingsincethisis not really needed as the absorber materials in question present very good light absorption properties.Innovation: By introducing advanced light management, the active layer thickness of thedevices could be reduced which would increase the throughput of the deposition tools, while aimingatmaintainingthesameefficiencylevel,resultinginasubstantialreductionofCAPEXatthe module level.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all TF Technology Types.Commercial readiness: About 20% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 70% for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 10% for projects with FID in 2020. This is then anticipated to rise to 40% for projects with FID in 2030.

Reduced efficiency gap Lab cells-Fab modules

Practice today: The typical efficiency gap between the best lab cells and best commercial modules is 25% (e.g. 15% module vs 20% cell).Innovation: By improving manufacturing processes (implementing best lab practices intoproduction) and mitigating all efficiency-reducing factors not inherent in the difference in area, the target gap reduction can be close to around 10% (e.g. 20% module and 22% cell). The impact onefficiencyprimarilyaffectsthethroughputandthemoduleCAPEX,withacascadeeffectontotherestoftheinstallation:BoSandOPEXprincipally.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all TF scenarios.Commercial readiness: About half of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 90% for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be as high as 100% for projects with FID in 2020 and for projects with FID in 2030.

Increased module efficiency

Practice today: Aperture area efficiency for TF modules varies with the technology. Typical valuesformature,glass-basedproductsare:12-15%forCIGSandCdTe.Forflexibleproductstherange drops to 7-10%.Innovation: This innovation covers a wide range of activities such as: the improvement of absorber materials (already addressed in section 4 of this document), interfaces and transparent conductors; the reduction of the proportion of inactive (interconnection) areas; applications of light management (already addressed in section 4), and more. Efficiency may rise to 18-


24%forCIGSandCdTeand15-20%forflexibleproducts.Considerable increases inefficiencyaremodelledasdecreasingmoduleCAPEXtogetherwithacascadeeffectontherestoftheinstallation:BoSandOPEXprincipally.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all TF scenarios.Commercial readiness: About 40% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 80% for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be as high as 100% for projects with FID in 2020 and for projects with FID in 2030.

Mitigation of degradation mechanisms

Practice today: DegradationmechanismshavebeenstudiedandunderstoodindetailforTFSi,wheretheyaremostprominent,butnotforCIGSandCdTewheretheymaybeproduct-relatedrather than typical for the technology as such.Innovation: To understand and mitigate, or at least accurately predict, degradation mechanisms under field operating conditions to be able to address them. The basic improvement would be inrelationtothereductionofthedegradationmechanismleadingtoanoverallhigherAEPoverthe lifetime of the installation and reduced loss.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all TF scenarios.Commercial readiness: About 20% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 80% for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 80% for projects with FID in 2020. This is then anticipated to rise to 100% for projects with FID in 2030.

New module materials

Practice today: Current practices in module manufacturing usually use glass-glass or glass-plastic configurations with aluminium frames.Innovation: Significantcostreductionpotentialforrigidmodulesislimited,sincemostofthematerials in question aremature products. As for Conventional c-Si and High Efficiency c-Sitechnology, frameless designs and the reduction of the thickness of the glass from 3mm to 1.5mmareoptions that could lead to lowerprices than the existingones leading toCAPEXreduction and resulting in better transmittance leading to greater efficiency.Relevance: The innovation is relevant for all TF scenarios.Commercial readiness: About 60% of the benefits of this innovation will be available for projects with FID in 2020, rising to 80% for projects with FID in 2030. Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 80% for projects with FID in 2020. This is then anticipated to rise to 100% for projects with FID in 2030.

43

7. Innovations in inverters7.1. OverviewInnovations in the area of inverters are anticipated to reduce the LCOE by around 4.0% to 5.9% between FID 2015 and 2030. The savings will be mainly as a result of considerable improvements inOPEXandasubstantialincreaseinAEP.

Figure 7.1 shows that the impact is broadly consistent between the Technology Types but variations are observed between ground-mounted installations and rooftop ones as the latter includes the effects of innovations almost specific to rooftop installation.

Figure 7.2 to Figure 7.4 and Table 7.1 to Table 7.3 show that the single innovation anticipated to deliver the greatest savings in this area is the improvement of inverter lifetime and reliability whichcouldresultinmajorsavings.SpecificdevelopmentstargetingrooftopapplicationsarealsoexpectedtoresultininterestingOPEXreductionsandincreasedAEPforsuchinstallations.


Figure 7.1 Anticipated impact of inverter innovations by Technology Type with FID in 2030, compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015.

Impact on CAPEX

4% 3% 2% 1% 0%


Impact on OPEX

0% -5% -10% -15% -20%


Impact on net AEP

4% 3% 2% 1% 0%


Impact on LCOE

0% -2% -4% -6% -8%



© Em

ilien S

imon

ot




Figure 7.2 Anticipated and potential impact of inverter innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using Conventional c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.

Integrated electronics including smart modules and micro-inverters

Improvement of inverter lifetime

PV inverters optimized for self-consumption

Impact on LCOE


0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7%

Table 7.1 Anticipated and potential impact of inverters innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using Conventional c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.


Integrated electronics including smart modules and micro-inverters -16.4% 15.3% 12.0% 5.9% -0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3%

Improvement of inverter lifetime -0.4% 12.2% 1.3% 5.2% -0.3% 9.8% 1.0% 4.2%

PV inverters optimized for self-consumption 0.7% 0.0% 1.3% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%


Figure 7.3 Anticipated and potential impact of inverter innovations for a rooftop PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.




Impact on LCOE


0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7%


7.1.3. Thin Film

Table 7.2 Anticipated and potential impact of inverter innovations for a rooftop PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.






Figure 7.4 Anticipated and potential impact of inverter innovations for a ground mounted PV installation using TF technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.




Impact on LCOE


0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8%

Table 7.3 Anticipated and potential impact of inverter innovations for a ground mounted PV installation using TF technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.







7.2. InnovationsInnovationsininvertersencompassarangeofimprovementstothiscrucialequipmentinanyPVinstallation, focusing particularly on reliability and lifetime extension. Within these innovations we also address the new development in integrated microelectronics allowing the emergence of the so-called smart module.

Integrated electronics including smart module and micro-inverters

Practice today: Today, the high efficiencies obtained with electronic equipment, >98.8% for power optimisers and >95% for micro-inverters, together with their relatively moderate cost and reliabilitymakethemseriousoptionstobepushedforwardforimplementationinPVinstallations.Together with these promising technical characteristics, further interesting potential lies in the fact that these devices can offer value-added features to PV plants such asmonitoring andcommunicationsystemsatthePVmodulelevel.Innovation: The improvement of these devices must address new design strategies and new materials to reduce costs. On top of this, reliability assessments should allow smooth and consistent integration into the PVmodule. Additionally, the development of fault detectionalgorithms and safety features should help to get the maximum value from monitoring and controlatthePVmodulelevel.Relevance: This innovation is fully relevant for rooftop installations; whilst only reaching a relevanceof20%inthecaseofground-mountedPVplants.Commercial readiness: the commercial readiness is expected to be 80% for projects with FID in 2020 and 100% for projects with FID in 2030.Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 10% for projects with FID in 2020. For projects with FID in 2030, the market share is anticipated rise to be 20%.


Practice today: Nowadays, inverters are one of the key issues in O&M and their relatively reduced lifetime of around 15 years imply major work and expense to replace such. Innovation: The first aspect involves developing new designs and using new materials to reduce the stress on components, overall increasing inverter reliability and lifetime to achieve a lifespanofover30yearstomatchPVmodules’ownlifetimeascloselyaspossible.Additionally,monitoring strategies could ease preventive and predictive maintenance through early fault detection. Overall, these strategies would make room for considerable CAPEX and OPEXoptimisation in relation to this equipmentRelevance: This innovation is considered 80% relevant for rooftop applications, while fully relevantinthecaseofgroundmountedPVplants.Commercial readiness: the commercial readiness is anticipated to be 70% for projects with FID in 2020 and 100% for projects with FID in 2030.Market share: Market share is anticipated to be 60% for projects with FID in 2020. For projects with FID in 2030, the market share is anticipated rise to be 80%.


PV inverter optimised for self-consumption

Practice today: The availability of High Efficiency (98%) and relatively low cost PV inverterswith optimisation of self-consumption is growing and manufacturers are working on designing adapted products for the distributed energy generation market.Innovation: Improved designs and the use of alternative materials like innovative semiconductors (SiC or GaN) allowing higher switching frequencies, higher power density (2 kg/kW), highervoltagelevelsandimprovedefficiency.TheseimprovementscombinewithCAPEXreductionsandfurtheroptimisationinelectricBoS.At the same time, although not modelled here, these devices are key in extracting the value of PV, aloneor coupledwith storage. Thus, the strategy focuseson lifetime assessment andreductionof lifecyclecostsofstoragetechnologies.PVforecasting,energymanagementandautomated building, like active inverters able to control the insertion of electric loads according toPVproduction.Relevance: This innovation is 100% relevant for rooftop applications and not relevant at all for ground-mounted scenarios.Commercial readiness: the commercial readiness is anticipated to be 90% for projects with FID in 2020 and reaching 100% for projects with FID in 2030.Market share: the market share is anticipated to reach 60% in 2020 and to raise to 75% in 2030

49

8. Innovations in operations, maintenance and service8.1. Overview Innovationsinoperations,maintenanceandservice(OMS)areanticipatedtoreducetheLCOEby0.8%to1.4%between2015and2030.ThesavingsaredominatedbyimprovementsinOPEXandpowerplantavailability,andhencenetAEP.

Figure8.1showsthattheimpactonOPEXisconsistentacrosstechnologies.

Figure 8.2 to Figure 8.4 and Table 8.1 to Table 8.3 show that the individual innovations with the greatest anticipated impact by FID 2030 related to the introduction of solutions to reduce maintenance activities in relation to vegetation treatment as well as smart plant monitoring

Figure 8.1 Anticipated impact of OMS innovations by Technology Type with FID in 2030, compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015.

Impact on CAPEX

4% 3% 2% 1% 0%


Impact on OPEX

0% -1% -2% -3% -4%


Impact on net AEP

0.8% 0.6% 0.4% 0.2% 0%


Impact on LCOE

0% -1% -2% -3% -4%



© iS

tock


to check the condition of solar equipment and ensure the management of power quality parameters. Through improved control strategies and better interaction between single components of power plants, the irradiation collected can be maximised therefore increasing theAEP.Thisnotonlyimprovestheefficiencyofpowerplantsbutwillalsosignificantlylowerthe LCOE.


Figure 8.2 Anticipated and potential impact of OMS innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using conv c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.

Smart PV plant monitoring

Improvement of PV plant power output forecasting

Zero cleaning solutions

Biotechnology / seed selection for zero vegetation treatment

Impact on LCOE


0% 1% 2% 3%

This Innovation results in an increase in the LCOE rather than a decrease. Its impact consists of improving the grid integration of PV eliminating limitations on PV market development.

Table 8.1 Anticipated and potential impact of OMS innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using conv c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.


Smart PV plant monitoring 0.0% 1.6% 0.7% 1.3% 0.0% 0.7% 0.3% 0.5%

Improvement of PV plant power output forecasting 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Zero cleaning solutions 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1%

Biotechnology / seed selection for zero vegetation treatment -0.2% 6.1% 0.0% 2.0% -0.1% 2.4% 0.0% 0.8%




Figure 8.3 Anticipated and potential impact of OMS innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.





Impact on LCOE


0% 1% 2% 3%


Table 8.2 Anticipated and potential impact of OMS innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.








8.1.3. Thin Film

Figure 8.4 Anticipated and potential impact of OMS innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using TF technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.





Impact on LCOE


0% 1% 2% 3%


Table 8.3 Anticipated and potential impact of OMS innovations for a ground mounted utility scale PV plant using TF technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.







53

8.2. InnovationsInnovationsinPVinstallationOMSvaryconsiderablyfromhighlypracticaltodeeplytechnicalissues. A subset of the more important of these has been modelled here.


Practice today: Today, monitoring systems are mainly used for (i) remote production management, (ii) maintenance management (alarms), planning and reporting and (iii) performance ratio (PR) calculation. Systemsgenerally consistof (i) anon-sitedatalogger thatcollects electrical data (inverter, strings, meters, etc.) and a meteorological station (radiation, temperature) for PR calculation and (ii)monitoring/management software that displays andmanages said data. These systems fail to detect the root causes of performance and availability problems, leading to plants’ underperformance and lack of availability.Innovation: Innovations in this field include advances in single plant and system portfolio monitoring and management including:- automated maintenance (preventive and emergency), intervention management and (re)

scheduling, based on parameters such as alarms and performance data.- algorithms for equipment or plant behaviour and reliability predictions based on historical

failure data and simulation models to prevent failures and optimise preventive maintenance.- optimisationofO&Mportfoliomanagement,accordingtocontractualobligationsandKPIsandlinkedtoalarmsandtechnicalstaffrealtimepositioning(GPS).

TheseimprovementsprincipallyleadtolowerOPEXandhavealsoapositiveimpactonAEPandthe reduction of loss.Relevance: The innovation is equally relevant to all scenarios.Commercial readiness: Around 60% half of the potential impact will be available for projects with FID in 2020. For projects with FID in 2030, the readiness rises to 100%.Market share: 20% of projects with FID in 2020 and 40% of projects with FID in 2030 will use the innovation.


Practice today:ElectricitygenerationfromPVplantsislimitedbythevaryingavailabilityofthesun’sradiation.DespitethefactthatgridoperatorsaregenerallyobligedtodispatchPVplantproductionatalltimes,thegrowingpenetrationofPVmayforcenewregulationstoguaranteegrid stability and the correct balancing of electricity supply and consumption at all times, causing unpredictable losses to plant owners.Innovation: ThepredictionofPVproductionwillbecomeanessentialtooltocaptureeconomiesin a market with large penetration of non-predictable energy (wind and solar). The innovation consists of the development of proper software based on algorithms that are able to match weather forecastswith PVplant characteristics in order topredict the energyproductionofPVplantsonanhourlybasis forat least thenext48hours. Thiswill allow (i)participation inthe power balancing market where remuneration is higher (ii) integration with storage if/when applicable and (iii) the determining of when maintenance interventions have less impact on cost.Predictionalsoaffectstheconsumptionprofiles(inself-consumptionscenarios)Relevance: The innovation is equally relevant to all scenarios.Commercial readiness: Around 60% half of the potential impact will be available for projects with FID in 2020. For projects with FID in 2030, the readiness rises to 100%.



Note that this innovation is responsible for an increase in the LCOE and is therefore not modelled here as the model used does not take such innovations into accountMarket share: 15% of projects with FID in 2020 and 25% of projects with FID in 2030 will use the innovation.


Practice today:RegularmodulewashingiscommonpracticeinPVplants.Theeffectofsoilingon a fixed-tilt solar plant in Europe (with enough rain) causes an average 2% power loss. This power loss can be as high as 11% in non-rainy environments but returns to 2% once it rains. Frequencyofwashingshouldbehigherinflatmoduleslocatedonroofs.Innovation: Anti-soiling catalysts can be used in module manufacturing or applied as retrofits to existing plants. Despite concerns in relation to transmittance that can be reduced, this practice can increase production, particularly in rainy, polluted sites with no inorganic soiling which will degrade the catalyst. The rain is needed in order to clean the degraded organic pollution. Without rain, thedirt remainson themodule.Withanegligible impactonCAPEX, themainpositiveeffectofthisinnovationisontheAEPandloss.Relevance: The innovation is fully relevant for rooftop applications while only 20% relevant for ground-mounted installations.Commercial readiness: 30% of the potential impact will be available for projects with FID in 2020. For projects with FID in 2030, the readiness rises to 50%.Market share: 10% of projects with FID in 2020 are expected to utilise the innovation. For projects with FID in 2030, the market share is anticipated to rise to 30%.


Practice today:Ground-mountedPVplantsmaysufferfromshadingifvegetationinsideandoutsidetheplantisnotproperlycontrolled.Naturalvegetation,particularlyinSouthernEurope,requires costly treatments. On average, perimetral vegetation (along the security system devices) needscuttingevery15daysfromMarchtoSeptember,whilethegrassinsidetheplantneedscutting at least three times a year.Innovation: The main lines in this area seek to reduce the maintenance required and exclude theuseofpesticidesordangerouschemicals.Specifically:- selection of seeds the growth of which is slow and limited in height so as to avoid the need

for frequent maintenance.- weed control fabrics inside the plant, under the modules and around the perimeter in order

to limit woven growth: such products combine soil erosion control and weed control into a single product, thereby reducing the amount of maintenance of green areas to a minimum

Relevance: The innovation is principally relevant to ground-mounted installation scenarios.Commercial readiness: 80% of the potential impact will be available for projects with FID in 2020. For projects with FID in 2030, the readiness rises to 100%.Market share: 25% of projects with FID in 2020 are expected to utilise the innovation. For projects with FID in 2030, the market share is anticipated to rise to 40%.

55

9.Summaryoftheimpact of innovations9.1. Combined impact of innovationsInnovationsacrossallelementsofPVinstallationsareanticipatedtoreducetheLCOEbyaround22%forConventionalc-Si,28%forHighEfficiencyc-Siand30%forTFamongstprojectswithFID in 2015 and 2030. Figure 9.1 shows that the savings are generated through a balanced contributionofreducedCAPEXandOPEXandincreasedAEP.

It is important to note that the impact shown in Figure 9.1 is an aggregate of the impact shown in Figure 4.1 to Figure 8.1 and as such excludes any other effects such as supply chain or scale effects.ThesearediscussedinSection9.3.Thelargestlike-for-likereductionsavailableforthesame Technology Type are for projects using TF. Nonetheless, both of the other Technology Types also show a relevant total impact on LCOE for projects with FID in 2030.

© Em

ilien S

imon

ot

Figure 9.1 Anticipated impact of all innovations by Technology Type with FID in 2030, compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015.

Impact on OPEX

0% -10% -20% -30% -40%


Impact on CAPEX

0% -10% -20% -30% -40%


Impact on LCOE

0% -10% -20% -30% -40%

Tech CV HE TF

Impact on net AEP

8% 6% 4% 2% 0%




9.2. Relative impact of cost of each STE plant elementInordertoexploretherelativecostofeachPVinstallationelement,Figure9.2showsthecostofallCAPEXelementsforallscenariosandFigure9.3reflectsthesameforOPEXandthenetcapacity factor. These figures show the reduction in costs and increased capacity factor over time for a given Technology Type, as well as the relative costs between different technologies.

Figure 9.2 CAPEX for PV installations with FID in 2015, 2020 and 2030.

€k/MW

1,500

1,250

1,000

750

500

250

0

Conv c-Si Ground HighEff c-Si Ground TF Ground Conv c-Si Roof HighEff c-Si Roof TF Roof15 20 30 15 20 30 15 20 30 15 20 30 15 20 30 15 20 30

•Modules •Inverters •BoS structures •BoS electrical •Dev. Constr & instalation


Figure 9.3 OPEX and net capacity factor for PV installations with FID in 2015, 2020 and 2030.

OPEX (€k/MW/yr) and CF (%)

40

30

20

10

0


•Operation and maintenance •Other OPEX •Net Capacity Factor



9.3. LCOE including the impact of other effectsInordertocompareLCOE,Figure9.4also incorporatestheothereffectsdiscussed inSection2.4. It shows that, with the benefit of increasing capacity factor over time, all Technology Types experience almost the same trend.

The contribution of innovations in each element to this LCOE reduction is presented in Figure 9.5 to Figure 9.7. It shows that innovations in cell and module manufacturing have a dominant effect on LCOE.

Figure 9.5 Anticipated impact of technology innovations for a ground mounted PV Installation using Conventional c-Si technology and with FID in 2030, compared with a PV installation with FID in 2015.

LCOE for a PV installation using Conventional c-Si technology with FID in 2015Advanced existing Homojunction technologies

Improvement of inverter lifetimeImprovement for Si material feedstock, FBR and metalurgical silicon

Improvement of existing heterojunction & new generation of cell heterojunction designInnovative framing. frameless concepts

Improvement in silicon crystallisationInnovations in wafering

13 other innovationsLCOE for a PV installation using Conventional c-Si technology with FID in 2030


70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%

Figure 9.4 LCOE for PV installations with FID 2015, 2020 and 2030 with other effects incorporated, (Ref.Section2.4.).

LCOE (€/MWh) and CF (%)

100

80

60

40

20

0


•LCOE with non-technical modifiers •Net Capacity Factor



Figure 9.6 Anticipated impact of technology innovations for a ground mounted PV Installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology and with FID in 2030, compared with a PV installation with FID in 20152.

LCOE for a PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2015Improvement of existing heterojunction & new generation of cell heterojunction design

Advanced existing Homojunction technologiesImprovement of inverter lifetime

Back contact cell structuresImprovement for Si material feedstock, FBR and metalurgical silicon

Innovative framing, frameless conceptsImprovement in silicon crystallisation

14 other innovationsLCOE for a PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2030


70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%

Figure 9.7 Anticipated impact of technology innovations for a ground mounted PV Installation using TF technology and with FID in 2030, compared with a PV installation with FID in 2015.

LCOE for a PV installation using TF technology with FID in 2015Reduce efficiency gap Lab cells-Fab modules

Increase module efficiencyImprovement of inverter lifetime

Mitigation of degradation mechanismsImproved deposition techniques

Development and integration of quality control methodsImproved light management

5 other innovationsLCOE for a PV installation using TF technology with FID in 2030


50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

59

10. ConclusionsInSections4.1to8.1,alargenumberofinnovationswiththepotentialtoreducetheLCOEbyFID2030 are considered. Within these, a number of distinct themes emerge, which will be the focus of the industry’s efforts to reduce costs:•Theimprovementofhomojunctiontechnology•The improvement of existing heterojunction technology & the new generation of cell

heterojunction design•Theimprovementofinverterlifetime•Atthethinfilmlevel,thereductionofthegapbetweenlabscalesampleandmodules.

Although we have looked separately at polysilicon purification, crystallisation, wafering and cell and module design and production, these are closely linked. The potential of some innovations toreducetheLCOEhasthereforebeenanalysedtakingintoconsiderationtheinfluencethesemight have on other innovations as they are technically linked.

The analysis performed in this report has assessed the impact of a list of selected innovationsontheLCOE,mainlybasedontheCAPEX,OPEXandAEP.Theresultsobtainedare therefore very useful to detect those innovations with greater potential for LCOE reduction, however, both the impact of the analysed improvements on the LCOE and other important aspects such as the impact on the power system must be considered. For example, there are improvements with a low or negative impact on the LCOE but with significant potential improvements in PV generated electricity integration. SuchimprovementswouldbeveryhelpfultoincreasethevalueofPVandthereforeeliminatebarrierstothegrowthofthePVmarket,especiallyincountrieswherethistechnologyhasalready reached high levels of penetration. Therefore, the interest of RD&D topics for the PVsectorshouldnotbebasedsolelyontheirpotentialimpactontheLCOEbutalsoonthose other aspects. A good example of this type of innovation is the development of moreefficientPVplantpoweroutputforecasting,whichwouldhaveanegative impactontheLCOEwhilesignificantlyincreasingthevalueofPVelectricityandeasingitssystemand market integration.

© Em

ilien S

imon

ot


According to the results, the current massively used conventional crystalline silicon technology isanticipatedtobepartlyreplacedinthefuturebydifferentoptionssuchashighefficiencyc-Sitechnology and also by thin film technology. This technology diversification will allow a better addressing of the needs of existing specific market segments like rooftop installations and the increasingofthemarketsizewithnewmarketopportunities.TheexpectedgrowthoftheBIPVmarket is an illustration of this last point and will require additional work on variable geometry andflexiblemodules.Theseevolutionswill impactthedemandsidewithenhancedproductoffer but also a new paradigm for the whole supply chain, where it is expected to move from a “one size fits all” mass scale production model to a more differentiated approach adapting to applications and geographies.

To sum up, a shift is required from a technology evolution based on cost reduction, as extensively described in this report, to a more systemic approach, designing for multi-level integration, with grids, buildings, etc. delivering the best value at the lowest cost.

Beyondthesetechnicalconsiderations, theevolutionof themarketalsohas tobetaken intoaccount. Thedevelopment of new, large PV installations is beingdrivenmore andmore bytender processes where the LCOE throughout the whole project life is key for the preparation of bids. There is increased acceptance among developers that the LCOE should be the key aspect in assessingtechnologychoices,hencetheinclusionofamorethoroughassessmentofOPEXandAEPtobalancetheassessmentofCAPEX,recognisingthatthecertainandimmediateCAPEXwillremainamorepowerfuldriverovertimethantheuncertainOPEX.MoreefficienttechnologyinherentlyhashigherCAPEXperwatt-peakbutmodulemanufacturershavereportedconcernsthat this is not fully appreciated by their customers.

Accordingtothesestatements,PVmodulemanufacturershavedemandingrequirements fortheir factories. Investment in existing production lines or in new production facilities will be needed if the full potential impact of innovations on the LCOE is to be achieved. If the demand is not secured and stabilised, the issue of market confidence will be critical to unlock many of the technology savings under development through sufficient levels of supply chain development.

More than 30 technological innovations have been identified as having the potential to cause a substantial change in the design of hardware, software and processes, with a resulting quantifiable impact on the cost of energy. Many more technical innovations are under development and therefore some of those described in this report may well be superseded by others. Overall, however, industry expectation is that the reduction in LCOE is expected in ranges according to the numbers described in this report. Indeed, in most cases, the expected impact of each innovation has been significantly moderated downwards in order to give overall LCOE reduction levels in line with industry expectations. The availability of such a range of innovations with the potential to impact LCOE more than shown gives us confidence that the picture described is achievable. In addition, it is important to remember that LCOE reductions are available through theothereffectsconsideredinSection2.4,althoughthesearenotexpectedtohavethesamedegree of impact as technological innovations.


NASA

Earth

Obs

erva

tory

imag

e by R

ober

t Sim

mon

11. About KIC InnoEnergyThe challenge is big, but our goal is simple: to achieve a sustainable energy future for Europe. Innovation is the answer. New ideas, products and solutions that make a real difference, new businesses and new people to deliver them to market.

At KIC InnoEnergy we support and invest in innovation at every stage of the journey – from classroom to customers. With our network of partners we build connections across Europe, bringing together inventors and industry, entrepreneurs and markets, graduates and employers, researchers and businesses.

We work in three essential areas of the innovation mix:•Education to help create an informed and ambitious workforce that understands what

sustainability demands and industry needs – for the future of the industry.• InnovationProjectstobringtogetherideas,inventorsandindustryincollaborationtoenable

commercially viable products and services that deliver real results.•BusinessCreationServicestohelpentrepreneursandstart-upswhoarecreatingsustainable

businesses to grow rapidly to contribute to Europe’s energy ecosystem.

Together, our work creates and connects the building blocks for the sustainable energy industry that Europe needs.

.


KIC InnoEnergy partners across Europe.

For more information onKIC InnoEnergy please visit: www.kic-innoenergy.com

KIC InnoEnergy is committed to reducing costs in the energy value chain, increasing security and reducing CO

2 and other greenhouse gas emissions. To achieve this, the company focuses its

activities around eight technology areas:• Electricity Storage• Energy from Chemical Fuels• Sustainable Nuclear and Renewable Energy Convergence• Smart and Efficient Buildings and Cities• Clean Coal Technologies• Smart Electric Grid• Renewable Energies, and• Energy Efficiency.

KIC InnoEnergy is supported by

the EIT, a body of the European Union


Appendix AFurther details of methodology

A detailed set of project assumptions was distributed to project participants in advance of their involvement in interviews and workshops.

A.1 DefinitionsDefinitionsofthescopeofeachelementareprovidedinSections4to8andsummarisedinTableA.1,below.

Table A.1 Definitions of the scope of each element.

Parameter Definition Unit

CAPEX

PV modules PaymenttoPVmodulemanufacturerforthesupplyofthemodulestothepoint €/W ofconnectiontothearraycables(canbecrystalline-SiorThin-Filmtechnology). INCLUDES •All production costs (cell supply [cell cost excluded], workforce, power, machinery, etc.) •Delivery to installer’s warehouse •10 years warranty + 25 years degradation warranty •Commissioning costs EXCLUDES •Supportstructures •OMScosts •RD&D costs

Inverters INCLUDES €/W •Paymenttoinvertermanufacturerforthesupplyoftheequipment to the point of connection to the array cables. •Delivery to installer’s warehouse •5 years warranty •Commissioning costs EXCLUDES •OMScosts •RD&D costs

BoS > structures INCLUDES €/W •Paymenttosupplierforthesupplyofthesupportstructure comprising the foundation and the support structure (fixed or tracker) •Delivery to installer’s warehouse •5 years warranty EXCLUDES •OMScosts •RD&D costs

BoS > collection grid INCLUDES €/W •Paymenttomanufacturerofelectricalmaterial (cables & other electrical elements, grid code compliance devices) •Delivery to installer’s warehouse •5 years warranty EXCLUDES •OMScosts •RD&D costs


Development, INCLUDES €/W Construction and •DevelopmentandconsentingworkpaidforbythedeveloperuptothepointofWCD. installation - Internal and external activities such as environmental and wildlife surveys, resource evaluation (includes metering devices), land negotiation, engineering (pre-FEED) and planning studies up to FID. - Further site investigation and surveys after FID - Engineering (FEED) studies -Projectmanagement(workundertakenorcontractedbythedeveloperuptoWCD) - Other administrative and professional services such as accountancy and legal advice •Transportationofallequipmentfromwarehousetosite •Transportationofequipmentonceonconstructionsite •Allinstallationworkforsupportstructures,modules,invertersandarraycables •CommissioningworkforthewholeinstallationexceptPVmodulesandinverters •Warranty •Commissioningcosts EXCLUDES •Anyreservationpaymentstosuppliers •Constructionphaseinsurance •Suppliersownprojectmanagement •Installationofsubstationandtransmissionassets •OMS •R&Dcosts

OPEX

Operation and Startsoncefirstmoduleiscommissioned.INCLUDES: €/W/yr maintenance •Operationalcostsinrelationtotheday-to-daycontrolofthePVplant including control room activities and admin/financial services •Conditionmonitoringifapplied •Plannedpreventivemaintenance,includingmodulecleaning(onceayear) and vegetation maintenance where applicable •Healthandsafetyinspections •Correctivemaintenanceandreplacementofbrokenequipment •Security(remotesurveillanceandpatrolling) •Inverterextendedwarrantywhenapplicable

Other OPEX Startsoncefirstmoduleiscommissioned.INCLUDES: Leasing of land or roof MWh/yr/MW Contributions to community funds including all types of tax where applicable. MonitoringofthelocalenvironmentalimpactofthePVfarmifapplicable.

AEP

Gross AEP ThegrossAEPinthefirstyearofthePVplant’slifeatoutputofthemodules MWh/yr/MW and inverters. Excludes electrical array losses and other losses.

Losses INCLUDES % •Performanceratiocomponents: - Temperature losses - Inverter losses - Electrical array losses to the metering point -Potentialinduceddegradation(PID)andLightinduceddegradation(LID) -LossesduetolackofavailabilityofPVplantelements. -Shadows - Low radiation losses Effect of degradation factor EXCLUDES:Transmission losses.

Net AEP The net AEP averaged over the STE plant life at the metering point at entry to the substation. MWh/yr/MW


A.2 AssumptionsBaseline costs and the impact of innovations are based on the following assumptions for solar photovoltaics.

Global assumptions• Real(mid2015)prices• Commoditypricesfixedattheaveragefor2015• Exchangeratesfixedattheaveragefor2015• Energypricesfixedatthecurrentrate• Marketexpectation“mid-view”(15%asCAGR)

PV installations assumptionsSiteattributesaredefinedasfollows,inlinewiththestateofthemarketfortodayandthenextyears.

General. The general assumptions are:• Installations’’capacityasindicatedinthetable• Depreciationtimeusedis30years• AnEPCcontractapproachisusedtocontractingforconstructionSpend profile

Year 1 is defined as year of first full generation. AEP and OPEX are assumed as 100% for years one through 30.Module technologies description•Conv c-Si: poly-crystalline silicon technology, average cell efficiency in the range of 17%,

module efficiency in the range of 15.5% in 2015 (245 Wp/module)•HighEfficiencyc-Si:monocrystallinewithaveragecellefficiency intherangeof19to20%,

module efficiency in the range of 17 to 18% in 2015 (270 Wp/module)•ThinFilm:averagemoduleefficiencyintherangeof13to14%in2015(100Wp/module)

- CdTe technology for ground mounted site types-CIGStechnologyforrooftopsitetype

Inverters•Groundmountedsitetypes:inthe500kWrange•Buildingmountedsitetype:inthe20kWrangeSupport structures•Groundmountedinstallations:fixedaluminiumstructurewithconcretefoundations•Rooftopinstallations:roofrackingArray electrical•Groundmountedinstallations:mediumvoltagewiringforcollectionsystem•Rooftopinstallations:lowvoltagewiringforcollectionsystemConstructionEPCcontractingensuretransportonajustintimebasisandconstruction.O&M•Ground mounted installations: local service team within 1 hour driving distance, with 7-day working

within office hours and remote management control room with data access via SCADA system.•Rooftopinstallations:lowcostO&Mstrategy,noremoteaccess.

Table A.2 Summary of Site Types.

Site Types Installed capacity (kWh/m2/yr) Global radiation Type of support Other characteristics

Ground 5 MW 1,320 Ground mounted Orientation optimal south

Roof-top < 100 kW 1,320 Roof mounted Roof mounted on factory or warehouse Orientation south but some shading problems

Table A.3 CAPEX spend profile.

Year -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0

CAPEX Spend 0% 0% 0% 0% 15% 85%


A.3 Other effects The table below corresponds to definitions made in Section 2.4. These figures are derivedfrom the results of the KIC InnoEnergy technology strategy and roadmap work stream and the consultation to experts lead afterwards, they are provided for completeness. They do not form an integral part of the study.

DECEXincludes:• Planningworkanddesignofanyadditionalequipmentrequired• RemovaloftheplantandPVinstallationfoundationstomeetlegalobligations,and• Furtherenvironmentalworkandmonitoring,ifrequired.

A.4 Example calculation of change in LCOE for a given innovationThe following example is intended to show the process of derivation and moderation of the impact of an innovation. There is some explanation of the figures used, but the focus is on methodology rather than content. The example used is the impact of innovation in “Biotechnology/seedselectionforzerovegetationtreatment”fora1MWPVConventionalc-Siground power plant.

To consider the impact of a technology innovation, a measure of LCOE is used, based on a fixed WACC.TheCAPEXspendprofileisannualisedbyapplyingafactorof0.066,whichisbasedonadiscount rate of 5%.

Table A.4 Summary of the impact of other effects.

Tech-Site-FID Transmission Pre-FID risk Supply chain Decommission-ing costs WACC

Conv c-Si-Ground-15 8.0% 0.5% -1.0% 0.2% 6.0%

High Efficiency c-Si-Ground-15 8.0% 0.5% -0.5% 0.2% 6.0%

Conv c-Si-Roof-15 12.0% 0.0% -1.0% 0.2% 4.0%

High Efficiency c-Si -Roof-15 12.0% 0.0% -0.5% 0.2% 4.0%

Conv c-Si-Ground-20 7.0% 0.4% -3.0% 0.2% 5.0%

High Efficiency c-Si -Ground-20 7.0% 0.4% -8.0% 0.2% 5.0%

Conv c-Si-Roof-20 9.0% 0.0% -3.0% 0.2% 4.0%


Conv c-Si-Ground-30 5.0% 0.3% -5.0% 0.2% 4.0%

High Efficiency c-Si -Ground-30 5.0% 0.3% -15.0% 0.2% 4.0%

Conv c-Si-Roof-30 8.0% 0.0% -5.0% 0.2% 4.0%


TF-Ground-15 8.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.2% 8.0%

TF-Building-15 12.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 6.0%

TF-Ground-20 6.0% 1.0% -2.0% 0.2% 7.0%

TF-Building-20 9.0% 0.0% -1.0% 0.2% 5.0%

TF-Ground-30 5.0% 1.0% -3.5% 0.2% 6.0%

TF-Building-30 8.0% 0.0% -2.0% 0.2% 5.0%


Maximum technical potential impactBasedonworkintheKICInnoEnergytechnologystrategyandroadmap,wederivethemaximumpotential impactof improvements inBiotechnologyonaPVplant tobe -2.5%and10.0%asrespectiveimpactsonBoSstructurecostsandOPEX.

Relevance to Technology TypeThe relevance for the innovation in thePV technology is anticipated tobe100%ongroundinstallations and to be 0% on roof type installations, as this innovation will not affect this type of PVplants.Thesevaluesareappliedbothtoconvc-SiandHighEfficiencyc-Si,sincetheinnovationis not technology dependant.

Commercial readinessThis innovation is considered to have a fast development potential therefore 80% of the benefits are anticipated to be available to project with FID in 2020, while the potential of the innovation is expected to be fully exploited for in 2030 with a 100% effect by this FID date.

Market shareFora2020timehorizon,itisanticipatedthat25%ofgroundPVprojectswillimplementthisinnovationwhereas, in 2030, this technology is expected to be implemented in 40% of the installations.

The anticipated LCOE impact is evaluated by comparing the LCOE calculated for the baseline case with the LCOE calculated for the target case. The target case includes the impact of the innovation onthecostsforeachelementandAEPparameters,aswellastheeffectsofrelevancetoSiteType,commercial readiness and market share. Target case impacts are calculated as follows:

ImpactforgroundPVon =Maximumpotentialimpact(-2.5%)BoSstructureforconv xRelevancetogroundprojects(100%)=-2.5%c-Si xCommercialreadinessatFIDin2030(100%)=-2.5% xMarketshareforprojectwithFIDin2030(40%)=-1.0%

ImpactforfixedOPEX =Maximumpotentialimpact(10.0%) xRelevancetogroundprojects(100%)=10.0% xCommercialreadinessatFIDin2030(100%)=10.0% xMarketshareforprojectwithFIDin2030(40%)=4.0%

The LCOE for the baseline and target cases then is calculated as in Table A.6. The anticipated impactof the innovationon the LCOE for this case is therefore (67.31–66.77) / 67.31=0.8%reduction in LCOE.

Figure A.4 Four-stage process of moderation applied to the maximum potential technical impact of an innovation to derive the anticipated impact on the LCOE.

Anticipated technical impact for a given Technology Type and year of FID

Technical potential impact for a given Technology Type and year of FID

Technical potential impact for a given Technology Type

Maximum technical potential impact of innovation under best circumstances

Relevance to Technology Type

Commercial readiness

Market share


A.5 References PV LCOE in Europe 2014-30 – Final Report,23June2015,EuropeanPVTechnologyPlatformSteeringCommittee,PVLCOEWorkingGroup.International Technology Roadmap for Photovoltaic (ITRPV) - 2014 Results. April 2015.Renewable Energy, Strategy & Roadmap 2015-2019 v2.0, July 2014, KIC InnoEnergy.

AppendixBData supporting tables

Table A.6 Calculation of the LCOE from cost and AEP data.

Parameter Baseline case Conv c-Si 2015 Target case Conv c-Si 2030

PV BoS structures (k€/MW) 63.45 63.45 x (1 - (-0.01)) = 64.08

Other CAPEX (€k/MW) 816.0 816.0

Total CAPEX (€k/MW) 879.45 880.08

Fixed OPEX (€k/MW/yr) 18.8 18.8 x (1 – 0.04) = 18.05

Other OPEX (€k/MW/yr) 12.0 12.0

Total OPEX (€k/MW/yr) 30.8 30.05

Net AEP (MWh/yr/MW) 1,320 1,320

LCOE (€/MWh) (879.55 x 0.066 + 30.8) x 1,000 / 1,320 = 67.31 (880.08 x 0.066 + 18.05) x 1,000 / 1,320 = 66.77

TableB.1Data relating to Figure 3.1.

Element Units Conv cSi High Eff cSi Conv cSi High Eff cSi TF TF Ground-15 Ground-15 Roof-15 Roof-15 Ground-15 Roof-15

Modules €k/MW 576 722 604.8 758.1 481 505.05

Inverters €k/MW 65 65 188 188 65 188

BoS structures €k/MW 63.45 56.19 130 115.14 72.85 149.26

BoS electrical €k/MW 11.1 9.83 300 265.71 12.74 344.44

Dev. Constr & instalation €k/MW 164 145.26 95 84.14 188.30 109.07


Element Units Conv cSi High Eff cSi Conv cSi High Eff cSi TF TF Ground-15 Ground-15 Roof-15 Roof-15 Ground-15 Roof-15

Operation and maintenance €k/MW/yr 18.8 18.6 20 20 19.3 21.3

Other OPEX €k/MW/yr 12 11.6 0 0 14 0

Net Capacity Factor % 15.07 15.07 15.07 15.07 15.07 15.07



Element Units Conv cSi Conv cSi High Eff cSi High Eff cSi TF TF Ground-15 Roof-15 Ground-15 Roof-15 Ground-15 Roof-15

LCOE with non-technical modifiers €/MWh 77.7 81.4 84.7 86.4 88.6 98.9

LCOE as % of Conv cSi-Ground-15 % 100 104.7 109.1 111.1 114.0 127.2

Net capacity factor % 15.1 15.1 151 15.1 15.1 15.1


Impact of innovation on... Conv cSi Conv cSi High Eff cSi High Eff cSi Ground Roof Ground Roof

CAPEX -18.20% -18.83% -25.39% -23.91%

OPEX -4.98% -4.08% -8.38% -5.88%

Net AEP 1.08% 1.50% 1.72% 1.88%

LCOE -14.52% -17.29% -21.37% -22.16%


Impact of innovation on... Conv cSi Conv cSi High Eff cSi High Eff cSi Ground Roof Ground Roof

CAPEX -4.40% -2.21% -5.20% -2.78%

OPEX -0.09% -0.06% -0.09% -0.06%

Net AEP 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

LCOE -2.90% -1.80% -3.59% -2.30%


Impact of innovation on... TF TF Ground Roof

CAPEX -32.59% -27.40%

OPEX -7.18% -6.52%

Net AEP 2.99% 3.03%

LCOE -25.11% -25.47%



Impact of innovation on... Conv cSi Conv cSi High Eff cSi High Eff cSi TF TF Ground Roof Ground Roof Ground Roof

CAPEX 0.95% 1.85% 0.98% 2.25% 0.46% 0.06%

OPEX -10.38% -17.80% -10.47% -17.80% -9.42% -14.05%

Net AEP 1.48% 4.26% 1.45% 4.17% 1.11% 2.34%

LCOE -4.41% -5.85% -4.02% -5.26% -4.38% -4.99%


Impact of innovations on... Conv cSi Conv cSi High Eff cSi High Eff cSi TF TF Ground Roof Ground Roof Ground Roof

CAPEX 0.07% 0.00% 0.06% 0.00% 0.09% 0.00%

OPEX -3.10% -1.07% -3.13% -1.08% -2.94% -1.08%

Net AEP 0.34% 0.59% 0.34% 0.58% 0.34% 0.57%

LCOE -1.37% -0.78% -1.28% -0.76% -1.41% -0.78%


Impact of innovation on... Conv cSi Conv cSi High Eff cSi High Eff cSi TF TF Ground Roof Ground Roof Ground Roof

CAPEX -20.72% -19.33% -28.21% -24.55% -32.13% -27.62%

OPEX -17.53% -22.05% -20.71% -23.52% -18.29% -20.52%

Net AEP 2.90% 6.35% 3.51% 6.62% 4.42% 5.89%

LCOE -21.88% -24.62% -28.36% -29.07% -29.93% -30.30%

TableB.10Data relating to Figure 9.2. (€k/MW)

Element

Modules 576.00 518.96 410.36 722.00 614.53 465.99 481.00 387.37 238.74

Inverters 65.00 66.35 67.42 65.00 66.35 67.42 65.00 66.37 67.60

BoS structures 63.45 60.35 52.47 56.20 49.37 39.82 72.85 68.01 59.34

BoS electrical 11.10 10.50 9.06 9.83 8.59 6.88 12.74 11.84 10.28

Dev. Constr & instalation 164.00 162.23 158.00 145.26 141.58 136.53 188.30 185.50 180.54

Conv c-Si Ground HighEff c-Si Ground TF Ground15 20 30 15 20 30 15 20 30


Element

Modules 604.80 562.45 449.64 758.10 669.69 531.55 505.05 408.04 253.18

Inverters 188.00 180.96 179.43 188.00 180.96 179.43 188.00 181.01 179.92

BoS structures 130.00 122.87 103.33 115.14 101.15 82.67 149.26 138.65 120.38

BoS electrical 300.00 285.00 239.59 265.71 234.61 191.68 344.44 321.68 279.88

Dev. Constr & instalation 95.00 93.95 91.07 84.14 82.09 79.36 109.07 107.45 104.58

Conv c-Si Roof HighEff c-Si Roof TF Roof15 20 30 15 20 30 15 20 30


Element Units

Operation and maintenance €k/MW/yr 18.80 16.57 14.27 18.60 16.15 13.73 19.30 16.89 14.34

Other OPEX €k/MW/yr 12.00 11.74 11.13 11.60 11.02 10.21 14.00 13.59 12.87

Net capacity factor % 15.07 15.24 15.51 15.07 15.30 15.60 15.07 15.28 15.73


Units

Net capacity factor % 15 15 16 15 15 16 15 15 16

LCOE with non-technical modifiers €/MWh 77.71 64.11 48.69 84.75 62.70 43.09 88.60 69.94 49.28

Element Units

Operations and Planned Maintenance €k/MW/yr 20.00 18.00 15.59 20.00 17.75 15.30 21.30 19.31 16.93

Unplanned Service and Other OPEX €k/MW/yr 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Net capacity factor % 15.07 15.46 16.02 15.07 15.53 16.07 15.07 15.40 15.96

Units

Net capacity factor % 15 15 16 15 16 16 15 15 16

LCOE with non-technical modifiers €/MWh 81.36 70.73 56.71 86.36 67.61 52.26 98.87 76.26 58.88

Conv c-Si Ground

Conv c-Si Ground

Conv c-Si Roof

Conv c-Si Roof

HighEff c-Si Ground

HighEff c-Si Ground

HighEff c-Si Roof

HighEff c-Si Roof

TF Ground

TF Ground

TF Roof

TF Roof

15 20 30

15 20 30

15 20 30

15 20 30

15 20 30

15 20 30

15 20 30

15 20 30

15 20 30

15 20 30

15 20 30

15 20 30


TableB.13 Data relating to Figure 9.5.

Innovation Relative impact of innovation on LCOE

LCOE for a PV installation using Conventional c-Si technology with FID in 2015 100%

Advanced existing Homojunction technologies 7.1%

Improvement of inverter lifetime 3.9%

Improvement for Si material feedstock. FBR and metalurgical silicon 1.9%

Improvement of existing heterojunction & new generation of cell heterojunction design 1.7%

Innovative framing. frameless concepts 1.5%

Improvement in silicon crystallisation 1.3%

Innovations in wafering 0.9%

13 other innovations 3.5%

LCOE for a PV installation using Conventional c-Si tech with FID in 2030 78.1%



LCOE for a PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si technology with FID in 2015 100%

Improvement of existing heterojunction & new generation of cell heterojunction design 5.0%

Advanced existing Homojunction technologies 4.6%


Back contact cell structures 3.4%

Improvement for Si material feedstock, FBR and metalurgical silicon 2.2%

Innovative framing. frameless concepts 1.8%

Improvement in silicon crystallisation 1.5%


LCOE for a PV installation using High Efficiency c-Si tech with FID in 2030 71.6%



LCOE for a PV installation using TF technology with FID in 2015 100%

Reduce efficiency gap Lab cells-Fab modules 6.8%

Increase module efficiency 6.0%


Mitigation of degradation mechanisms 3.4%

Improved deposition techniques 2.8%

Development and integration of quality control methods 2.2%

Improved light management 1.8%


LCOE for a PV installation using TF technology with FID in 2030 70.1%


List of figures

Number Page Title

Figure 0.1 06 Anticipated impact of all innovations by Technology Type with FID in 2030, compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015.

Figure0.2a 07 AnticipatedimpactoftechnologyinnovationsforagroundmountedPVInstallationusingConventionalc-SitechnologyandwithFIDin2030,comparedwithaPVinstallationwithFIDin2015.

Figure0.2b 07 AnticipatedimpactoftechnologyinnovationsforagroundmountedPVInstallationusing HighEfficiencyc-SitechnologyandwithFIDin2030,comparedwithaPVinstallationwithFIDin2015

Figure0.2c 07 AnticipatedimpactoftechnologyinnovationsforagroundmountedPVInstallationusingTFtechnologyandwithFIDin2030,comparedwithaPVinstallationwithFIDin2015.

Figure2.1 16 ProcesstoderivetheimpactofinnovationsontheLCOE.

Figure 2.2 16 Four stage moderation process applied to the maximum potential technical impact of an innovation to derive the anticipated impact on LCOE

Figure3.1 20 BaselineCAPEXbyelement.

Figure3.2 21 BaselineOPEXandnetcapacityfactor.

Figure3.3 22 RelativeLCOEandnetcapacityfactorforbaselinePVinstallationswithothereffectsincorporated, (ref.Section2.4).

Figure4.1 23 AnticipatedimpactofPVcellmanufacturinginnovationsbyTechnologyTypewithFIDin2030,comparedwith a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015

Figure4.2 23 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofPVcellmanufacturinginnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingconventionalc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Figure4.3 25 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofPVcellmanufacturinginnovationsforarooftopPVinstallationusingHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Figure5.1 31 AnticipatedimpactofPVmodulemanufacturinginnovationsbyTechnologyTypewithFIDin2030,compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015

Figure5.2 32 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofPVmodulemanufacturinginnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingConventionalc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Figure5.3 33 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofPVmodulemanufacturinginnovationsforarooftopPVinstallationusingHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Figure 6.1 37 Anticipated impact of TF module innovations with FID in 2030, compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015

Figure6.2 38 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofTFmoduleinnovationsforagroundmountedPVinstallationusingTF technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same SiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Figure 7.1 43 Anticipated impact of inverter innovations by Technology Type with FID in 2030, compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015

Figure7.2 44 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofinverterinnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingConventionalc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.


Figure7.3 44 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofinverterinnovationsforarooftopPVinstallationusingHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Figure7.4 45 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofinverterinnovationsforagroundmountedPVinstallationusingTFtechnology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same SiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Figure8.1 49 AnticipatedimpactofOMSinnovationsbyTechnologyTypewithFIDin2030,comparedwithaplantwiththe same nominal power with FID in 2015

Figure8.2 50 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofOMSinnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingconvc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Figure8.3 51 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofOMSinnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Figure8.4 52 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofOMSinnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingTF technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same SiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Figure 9.1 55 Anticipated impact of all innovations by Technology Type with FID in 2030, compared with a plant with the same nominal power with FID in 2015.

Figure9.2 56 CAPEXforPVinstallationswithFIDin2015,2020and2030.

Figure9.3 56 OPEXandnetcapacityfactorforPVinstallationswithFIDin2015,2020and2030.

Figure9.4 57 LCOEforPVinstallationswithFID2015,2020and2030withothereffectsincorporated,ref.Section2.4.

Figure9.5 57 AnticipatedimpactoftechnologyinnovationsforagroundmountedPVInstallationusingConventionalc-SitechnologyandwithFIDin2030,comparedwithaPVinstallationwithFIDin2015.

Figure9.6 58 AnticipatedimpactoftechnologyinnovationsforagroundmountedPVInstallationusingHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologyandwithFIDin2030,comparedwithaPVinstallationwithFIDin2015.

Figure9.7 58 AnticipatedimpactoftechnologyinnovationsforagroundmountedPVInstallationusingTFtechnologyandwithFIDin2030,comparedwithaPVinstallationwithFIDin2015.

List of tables

Number Page Title

Table 2.1 16 Information recorded for each innovation.

Table3.1 20 Baselineparameters.

Table4.1 24 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofPVcellmanufacturinginnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingconventionalc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Table4.2 25 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofPVcellmanufacturinginnovationsforarooftopPVinstallationusingHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Table5.1 32 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofPVmodulemanufacturinginnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingConventionalc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.


Table5.2 33 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofPVmodulemanufacturinginnovationsforarooftopPVinstallationusingHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Table 6.1 38 Anticipated and potential impact of TF module innovations for a ground mounted PV installation using TF technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same Site Type with FID in 2015.

Table7.1 44 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofinvertersinnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingConventionalc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Table7.2 45 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofinverterinnovationsforarooftopPVinstallationusingHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Table7.3 45 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofinverterinnovationsforagroundmountedPVinstallationusingTFtechnology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same SiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Table8.1 50 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofOMSinnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingconvc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Table8.2 51 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofOMSinnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingHighEfficiencyc-SitechnologywithFIDin2030,comparedwithaninstallationwiththesamenominalpoweronthesameSiteTypewithFIDin2015.

Table8.3 52 AnticipatedandpotentialimpactofOMSinnovationsforagroundmountedutilityscalePVplantusingTF technology with FID in 2030, compared with an installation with the same nominal power on the same SiteTypewithFIDin2015.


© KIC InnoEnergy, 2015

The Future renewable energy costs: solar photovoltaics report is a property of KIC InnoEnergy. Its content, figures and data may only be re-used and cited with a clear reference to KIC InnoEnergy as the source.

The document is also available in an online format on the KIC InnoEnergy website: www.kic-innoenergy.com

For more information about the report, please contact: [email protected]

Design: Cosmic.es Printandbinding:Agpograf

80

KIC InnoEnergy High Tech Campus 695656 Ag EindhovenThe [email protected]

KIC InnoEnergy receives funding from the European Institute

of Innovation and Technology

· B E N E LU X · F R A N C E · G E R M A N Y · I B E R I A · POLAND PLUS · S W E D E NE U R O P E

Future renewable energy costs: solar photovoltaics

Documents

Transcript of Future renewable energy costs: solar photovoltaics